EASTER ISLAND (RAPA NUI) POLISH SPELEOLOGICAL EXPLORATION Editor: Zdzisław Jan Ryn POLISH ACADEMY OF ARTS AND SCIENCES EASTER ISLAND (RAPA NUI) POLISH SPELEOLOGICAL EXPLORATION Editor: Zdzisław Jan Ryn Kraków, Poland 2012 © Copyright by Polska Akademia Umiejętności ISBN Table of contents Introduction Andrzej Ciszewski .................................................................................................. 9 Presentation Andrzej Ciszewski ................................................................................................ 11 PREHISTORY OF RAPA NUI (EASTER ISLAND): A GENERAL OUTLINE Michał Wasilewski ............................................................................................... 13 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 15 FIRST SETTLEMENT ....................................................................................... 16 CHRONOLOGY OF EASTER ISLAND’S MATERIAL CULTURE .......... 24 THE ECOLOGY OF RAPA NUI ..................................................................... 36 CONCLUSIONS: CRISIS AND COLLAPSE................................................. 50 REFERENCES .................................................................................................... 55 THE LAVA CAVES OF RAPA NUI, THE LITHIC MATERIAL FOR ITS STATUES, AND THE ISLAND’S GEOLOGICAL STRUCTURE Andrzej Paulo ...................................................................................................... 61 EXPLORING THE GEOLOGY OF THE ISLAND ...................................... 63 AND ITS SURROUNDINGS ........................................................................... 63 THE ISLAND’S GEOLOGICAL STRUCTURE ............................................ 66 Submarine forms ............................................................................................ 66 Surface forms .................................................................................................. 67 The Poike Group ............................................................................................ 68 The Rano Kau Group..................................................................................... 70 The Terevaka Group ...................................................................................... 72 INTRODUCTION TO VOLCANIC PHENOMENOLOGY ...................... 75 Forms created by flowing lava contrasted with lava sprayed into the air ................................................................................................... 75 Lava flows and lava caves .............................................................................. 79 Craters.............................................................................................................. 82 Classification of volcanic rocks .................................................................... 84 5 Water resources .............................................................................................. 85 The soil and its erosion.................................................................................. 87 Schematic map of volcanic groups ............................................................... 89 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................... 89 EASTER ISLAND AND ITS CAVES Zdzisław Jan Ryn ................................................................................................. 93 1. GEOGRAPHICAL AND BIOLOGICAL BACKGRUND ....................... 95 The island’S Physiography ............................................................................ 95 Climate............................................................................................................. 95 The Soils of rapa nui and their use .............................................................. 96 The vegetation and animal world................................................................. 98 2. SOCIOLOGY AND CULTURE .................................................................. 99 Population and social organisation .............................................................. 99 Ahu altars and moai statues ........................................................................ 100 3. CAVES IN LEGENDS AND CEREMONIES .......................................... 102 The Take and Manu ceremonies................................................................. 103 The Caves and mana .................................................................................... 103 The Legend of the Cave of the Virgins ...................................................... 103 4. NAMES OF THE CAVES ........................................................................... 104 5. TRAVELLERS’ AND DISCOVERERS’ REPORTS ON THE CAVES .......................................................................................... 105 Jacob Roggeveen’s observations (1722) ..................................................... 105 Felipe Gonzalez’s description (1770) ......................................................... 106 La Perouse’s report (1786) ........................................................................... 106 William J. Thomson’s account (1886) ........................................................ 106 Katherine Routledge’s observations (1914)............................................... 108 Sebastian Englert’s description (1935–1969) ............................................ 108 Alfred Metraux’s observations (1940) ....................................................... 109 Thor Heyerdahl’s description (1955–1956) .............................................. 110 Ramón Campbell’s description (1964–1994)............................................ 112 6. THE BEST KNOWN CAVES..................................................................... 114 Ana Kai Tangata: the Cave of the Cannibals ............................................ 114 Ana Hue Neru and Ana O Keke: the Caves of the Virgins....................... 114 7. ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE CAVES ......................................................... 115 Petroglyphs.................................................................................................... 116 The Rongo-rongo tablets .............................................................................. 116 6 Table of contents 8. WHAT THE CAVES WERE USED FOR ................................................. 117 Burial sites ..................................................................................................... 117 Leper Caves ................................................................................................... 118 The childbed cave......................................................................................... 119 9. SAVE RAPA NUI’S UNDERGROUND TREASURE ............................ 119 A psychological interpretation ................................................................... 119 Irreparable loss ............................................................................................. 120 Recorded in stone ......................................................................................... 121 REFERENCES .................................................................................................. 122 POLISH SPELEOLOGICAL RESEARCH Andrzej Ciszewski and Zdzisław Jan Ryn ....................................................... 125 METHODOLOGY FOR THE CAVE INVENTORY AND SELECTED PLANS Andrzej Ciszewski .............................................................................................. 131 PRINCIPLES FOR THE NUMERATION OF THE CAVES..................... 133 METHODOLOGY OF CAVE SURVEY ...................................................... 133 COMPILATION OF CAVE PLANS ............................................................. 134 SELECTED CAVE PLANS AND DESCRIPTIONS ................................... 135 ARCHAEOLOGICAL OBJECTS IN THE CAVES OF EASTER ISLAND Maciej Sobczyk................................................................................................... 139 STONE ARTWORKS ...................................................................................... 142 MOVEABLE ARTEFACTS............................................................................. 142 CAVE ARCHITECTURE ............................................................................... 144 THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVENTORY OF SELECTED CAVES ...... 146 Ana Toki Toki ............................................................................................... 146 Ana Tari Moai ............................................................................................... 147 Ana Te Pora ................................................................................................... 147 Ana kionga .................................................................................................... 148 Ana Vai Teka ................................................................................................. 149 Unnamed cave 1 ........................................................................................... 150 Unnamed cave 2 ........................................................................................... 150 7 Unnamed cave 3 ........................................................................................... 150 Unnamed cave 4 ........................................................................................... 151 RAPA NUI: A TRANS-CULTURAL CONFLICT Zdzisław Jan Ryn ............................................................................................... 153 ATTITUDES TO FOREIGNERS ................................................................... 158 ANNEXATION BY CHILE ............................................................................ 159 COMPLEXES .................................................................................................... 162 THE ISLAND SYNDROME........................................................................... 165 TAPATI RAPANUI .......................................................................................... 168 8 Introduction INTRODUCTION The idea to compile an inventory of the caves of Easter Island (Rapa Nui) emerged during a meeting with Zdzisław Jan Ryn in 1999, at one of the sessions of the Polish branch of the Explorers Club in Kraków. Zdzisław had already visited the island several times in his capacity as Polish Ambassador to Chile. For me the Island was one of those mystical places on earth which I definitely wanted to see, especially as I’d been inspired tremendously by Thor Heyerdahl’s books. At that time only a few score of the caves had been explored, and the available documentation was far from satisfactory. So we decided that it would be a good idea to plan a programme to make a systematic record of the caves of Easter Island and to carry it out. Alongside the topographical aspects of the caves, we took into consideration their archaeological and anthropological qualities, for there is probably no other place on earth where caves have played such an important role in the history of the local community, both in the past and continuing well-nigh up to the middle of the 20th century. In 2001 we organised our first, reconnaissance, expedition. We learned that the island’s subterranean world is much richer than what we could have expected on the basis of the literature . During this expedition we started the cartographic work in several parts of the island and did as much as we could in the short spell of our visit. But this initial study laid the foundation for an ambitious programme the aim of which was to inventory the caves as fully as possible. Then the arduous preparations began, especially to secure the funds necessary for the project. Our next trips, which were financed by participants, were visits by teams of just a few individuals and progress on our project was very slow. 2008 marked a breakthrough. We managed to organise a six-week expedition under the auspices of National Geographic, the Polish Alpinist Association, and the Explorers Club. 18 experienced Polish speleologists took part in this expedition. The very intensive work carried out by an efficient team resulted in the compilation of cartographic documentation for 315 caves in selected parts of the island. A National Geographic camera crew filmed our work.1 1 National Geographic Television. Explorer: Easter Island Underworld. 24 April 2009 9 The fieldwork was conducted with the approval of the management of the Corporación National de Forestación (CONAF) and in collaboration with the local authorities, such as the Gobernación Isla de Pascua, Municipalidad Isla de Pascua, Consejo de Monumentos Nacionales, Parque Nacional Isla de Pascua, Consejo de Ancianos, and with the help of many of the local inhabitants. We pursued our activities under the patronage of the Easter Island Studies Centre at the University of Chile. We would like to thank all of these individuals and institutions for their assistance and ask for their continuing help for our future undertakings. As a result, after a year of teamwork in Poland, we were able to publish the world’s first inventory of the caves of Easter Island, along with indispensable additional information. Thanks to this The Caves of Easter Island: The Underground World of Rapa Nui, the book which was the outcome of our team effort, is a publication featuring important data to supplement the inventory.2 I hope that in the future we shall be able to continue our explorations on Easter Island (socio-political conditions permitting), to save the caves and potholes, which make up such a paramount part of the rich culture of Rapa Nui, from falling into oblivion. We would like to thank the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences of Kraków for the opportunity to present the results of our exploration at an official session and for publishing the conference proceedings in the present volume. Andrzej Ciszewski Expedition leader 2 10 The Caves of Easter Island. Underground World of Rapa Nui. Las Cuevas de Isla de Pascua. El Mundo Subterráneo de Rapa Nui. (2009). Editors: Andrzej Ciszewski, Zdzisław Jan Ryn, Mariusz Szelerewicz. Kraków (Poland): Pracownia Kreatywna, 368 pp. (in English and Spanish). Presentation PRESENTATION We are handing the first monograph of the Easter Island’s caves over to all interested readers. The book is an attempt of systematization of the recent recognition of the underground world of the island. The volcanic caves on Rapa Nui have constituted a significant part of the history and tradition incomparable with any other part of the world. For the majority of inhabitants they are still very important. For this reason, working out the complete cave inventory forms the basis for multidisciplinary studies, especially archaeological and anthropological, connected with caves. We wish it had happened earlier, because as we know from the old descriptions, many caves were full of the monuments of material culture, which we will not be able to find. The historical names of the caves connected with their use, not only the living one, have started to be forgotten. Therefore this is the last moment to rescue from oblivion this part of tradition and material culture underestimated by archaeologists and inhabitants, so far concentrated on the inventory and the research of cultural objects on the island. First serious works aimed at conducting the inventory were made just in 1980s but they have not been finished yet. The Polish initiative dated back to 2001 is aimed at constructing the complete inventory of the island’s caves to show the wealth and specific character of this world. The field works were conducted with the approval of the management of Corporation National de Forestation (CONAF) and in collaboration with the local authorities, such as the Governor’s Office [Gobernación Isla de Pascua], Minicipalidad Isla de Pascua, Consejo de Monumentos Nacionales, Consejo de Ancianos and many inhabitants. We acted under the patronage of the Centre of Easter Island Studies at Universidad de Chile. We would like to thank to all of them counting on further cooperation. The documentation of 315 caves in three recommended by CONAF and the most abundant in caves areas of the island has been made as a result of the conducted inventory. Nine submarine caves have been surveyed as well. Other information, including the cultural content of the caves, was given in separate report to CONAF for its exclusive use. The presented monograph provides general information on the island, cave genesis and the role of the caves in the population history and culture; 11 and on various ways of their use. The detailed part presents the outline geology of Easter Island and the genesis of caves. In separate chapter big and small archaeological objects are described synthetically. The extensive bibliography, prepared for the first time in such a wide range, will lead the reader through the worldwide writing. 315 cave plans with descriptions are the integral part of the presented monograph. The book has been enriched in own photographic documentation. It is worth adding that the book is a result of multi-stage collective work of many different experts connected by the passion of discovering and exploring. From the beginning our expeditions were organized under the patronage of The Explorers Club. The speleological documentation has been made by the members of clubs associated in the Polish Mountaineering Association. The expedition took place under the scientific patronage of the Jagiellonian University of Cracow, University of Warsaw, AGH University of Science and Technology in Cracow and the Polish Society for Latin American Studies. Our activity has been documented in the movie “Rapa Nui Underworld” (2009) produced by the National Geographic team. In the future we would like to make the documentation of other caves and publish the catalogue of the cave names. This material will facilitate the conduction of multidisciplinary researches of the underground world of Rapa Nui, still hiding the secrets of the most ancient past of the island and its inhabitants. Andrzej Ciszewski Expedition leader Cracow, November 2011 12 PREHISTORY OF RAPA NUI (EASTER ISLAND): A GENERAL OUTLINE Michał Wasilewski Prehistory of Rapa Nui (Easter Island): A General Outline INTRODUCTION We have, in small islands, the greatest diversity of ecological, cultural, and economic style that we have anywhere in the world. Furthermore, because these are island cultures, we actually have in them the closest thing to a model of the whole world…. Easter Island was a good example of planet Earth. Easter Island people got there and they knew they could never get away. They were there for keeps as far as they knew. (M. Mead, 1976: 25–26). Most publications on Rapa Nui, which has been called Easter Island since the 18th century, begin by drawing attention to its extraordinary isolation. Easter Island’s remote location is all the more noteworthy, considering that it is precisely from this perspective that the questions most often posed about it assume particular significance. This essay is an attempt to summarise the long-term scientific studies carried out on Rapa Nui and in so-called Remote Polynesia, as well as the latest, oftentimes controversial or revolutionary studies of the most interesting aspects of the island’s archaeology. It’s not an easy task, as this land has become a classic scientific “laboratory” for the testing of numerous hypotheses and theories. Today, however, it seems that despite appearances and established scenarios, it is not easy to describe the prehistory of this island. The first of four basic questions that appear in the literature on the subject concerns the origins of Rapa Nui’s inhabitants. How large was the founding group, where did they come from, and did they have later contact with other territories or not? A question which is undoubtedly connected with these issues is the hypothesis of several waves of colonists, which, however, requires a more thorough discussion and does not seem so convincing today as it once did. Secondly, there is a continuing dispute still going on when the island was settled. The suggested scenarios situate the date of settlement between 400 and 1200 AD, and although some of the dates put forward have long been discredited they still appear in the literature. This question is worth closer examination. The third extremely important problem, the solution of which will shed a lot of light on the island’s prehistory, is the ecology of its population. Today many archaeologists, anthropologists and ecologists are working 15 on issues connected with the interaction between humans and the environment. There is a widespread tendency to treat Easter Island (and several other Polynesian islands) as a natural laboratory that can give us answers to questions regarding the influence of overpopulation, environmental stress and the anthropological alteration of ecosystems on culture, economic fluctuations and above all on the growth and decline of human societies. However, there is no agreement on the answers to particular questions, such as the role of man and other factors on the transformation of the ecosystem. The nature of the island’s biocenosis before the first colonisation is another question yet to be answered fully. The last matter is one of the four most frequently posed questions. What were the causes, mechanisms, course and time of the decline of the Rapa Nui culture? Contrary to current opinion, neither the dates of the beginning nor of the end of these processes have been established. Did they have any connection with the arrival of Europeans, did they occur earlier, or perhaps later? How large was the island’s population and how quickly did it decline? Did Rapa Nui society in general experience a crisis, or was it stable? This essay will attempt to organise the available information and opinions, and bring answers to these and several other questions connected with the prehistory of Easter Island. FIRST SETTLEMENT It is not easy to specify just what it is that makes humans migrate. It is all the more difficult to answer the question why people set out into the unknown, especially across a vast ocean. Perhaps what made man embark on voyages out into Oceania were changing climatic conditions and the resultant scarcity, or perhaps want, of resources. The demographic and social situation was undoubtedly important, too. A growing population could have intensified economic problems. Social considerations, initiation rituals, rivalry for power or influence and the desire for independence could have triggered successive endeavours to colonise new islands. Finally, after years of maritime experience, the seafaring tradition might have been strong enough for people to leave their native land in search of a new home and challenges. 16 Prehistory of Rapa Nui (Easter Island): A General Outline According to local tradition, the legendary King Hotu Matu’a and his small group of supporters were the first to land on Rapa Nui. The current version of the first king’s name was probably established and put on record by Europeans (perhaps by Father Hippolyte Roussel in 1860), who tried to summarise the plethora of local myths (Fischer, 2005). We have reason to suspect that earlier he had been known by many different names, for example Tu’u ko Iho (Fischer, 1994). Right at the beginning of the attempt to answer the question of the Easter Islanders’ origins we come up against the multiple-visit problem. Legend has it that Hotu Matu’a sent seven scouts before his own voyage in two boats. His people found a new land and planted yam there for future generations. However, even they were not the first to colonise the Island. They met the old man Ngā Tavake’a Te Rona, who had already been living there with another elderly man for a long time, and who, as the legend says – was the one to observe the landing of Hotu Matu’a’s boats (Fischer, 2005). Today it is impossible to decipher the exact meaning of this lore. We may suspect that it tells the story of different clans living on the Island rather than different colonists landing separately on it, assuming of course that it contains a grain of truth at all. Following the population bottleneck in the mid-19th century which impoverished and modified the ancient oral tradition (Fischer, 2005), most researchers are extremely wary of interpreting information of this kind to any degree of certainty. However, it cannot be ruled out that these legends carry a reflection of historical facts. Many scholars believe that two small canoes, each carrying 30–40 people, may have arrived on the Island (Fischer, 2005). The group was led by its chief or king, and was made up of members of a lineage, kin, or a clan. The first settlers must have reached the south-western shore, in the vicinity of the present-day town of Hanga Roa. Both archaeological and palaeobotanical research confirm that this was, and still is the most densely populated area (Fischer, 2005).1 Numerous scientifically valid and fantasised hypotheses on the origins of Easter Island’s native inhabitants have been proposed since its “discovery” by the Dutch expedition under Jacob Roggeveen in 1722. We shall not go into the fantasised ones, although some of them are quite charming, for example the story put forward by the Hungarian scholar W. Hévesy 1 Hanga Roa is the only municipality on the island. 17 around 1930, about the alleged Harappan roots of the Rapanui culture,2 or J.A. Moerenhout’s speculation that the Rapanuis were survivors from the lost continent of Mu (1837). One of the first scientific hypotheses was the one about the Negroid (i.e. Melanesian) origins of at least some of the Rapanuis, proposed by C.S. Routledge. She identified them with the Long Ears (Hanau-eepe). According to this concept, Melanesians settled on the Island after passing the Bismarck Archipelago, the Solomon Islands, Fiji and the Marquesas, well before the Short Ears, viz. Polynesians (Hanau-momoko) (Murrill, 1968). Today this hypothesis has been completely discredited as it has found no support in anthropological materials (Lum and Cann, 2000). One of the theories which has been most widely disseminated in scientific as well as popular literature is Thor Heyerdahl’s hypothesis on the South American origins of the Easter Islanders. To test the possibility of such contacts, Heyerdahl conducted the experiment known as “The Kon-Tiki Voyage” (Heyerdahl, 1950). The concept was supported by a plethora of cultural features supposedly shared by South America and Rapa Nui. One of the most interesting and well known was the Rapa Nui genealogical myth, according to which Makemake the Primeval Being took a bottle gourd, a stone and a lump of earth, made a hole in each of them and, as the myth says, “copulated with” them, to create a human being. He did not get any results with the gourd and the stone but was third time lucky with the lump of clay – and so this is how man was created out of earth (Fischer, 2005). However, the most interesting part of the story is the first try with the bottle gourd (Lagenaria siceraria), because it is a native American plant. Myths of the same kind are shared by the Kogi Indians of Colombia, the Postawugok of Venezuela, and the Shipibo from Amazonia (Heiser, 1979). Heyerdahl suggested a cultural affinity between the Rapanuis and Amerindians. He cited more similarities (see Heyerdahl, 1950), but although they are very often used by proponents of this hypothesis, we should emphasise that there are many more affinities between the Polynesian and Rapanui mythologies than between the Rapanui and American ones (Fischer, 2005). 2 18 This theory was constructed on an alleged striking similarity between the Rongo-Rongo characters and the Harappan undeciphered script. Prehistory of Rapa Nui (Easter Island): A General Outline Archaeological evidence has also been widely applied in this debate. First of all, according to some scientists, there are material items that are almost identical in both regions. There is the anthropo-zoomorphic figurine with inlaid shell and obsidian eyes, found in 1870 on the Chincha Islands off the Paracas Peninsula of Peru (Heyerdahl, 1979). The other artefact is the sculpture of a sitting woman resembling the moai papa, from the Chimu site, found about 1880 (Heyerdahl, 1979). Heyerdahl also observed similar cultural traditions like the Pleiades cult, skull trephination, totora reed-boats and rafts, sunken gardens and many others (Heyerdahl, 1950). Heyerdahl and others have made numerous references to the Tiwanaku (i.e. megalithic) architectural style of the earliest phases of ahu construction, also observed in other Polynesian ceremonial structures (Heyerdahl, 1950; Martinsson-Wallin and Crockford, 2001). According to Heyerdahl’s opinion, it was the work of newcomers from Lake Titicaca (the Long Ears) who were the first to settle on Easter Island and were later exterminated or subjugated by the Polynesians (the Short Ears). The oral tradition on the internecine fighting on the Island was invoked to corroborate this interpretation. Today the megalithic structures seem to be just one more superficial similarity and, moreover, neither the anthropological nor genetic tests show any radical differences between the two groups of indigenous Rapanuis (Murrill, 1968; Lie et al., 2006). The discussion has encompassed ecological arguments, too. The most interesting is the American origin of the sweet potato, bottle gourd and several other plants that occur on Easter Island (Wallin, 1999). In addition to biology, some linguistic affinities have not escaped notice. One of the most interesting is the phonetic similarity of the Polynesian word kumara and Quechuan cumar, both of which mean “sweet potato” (Wallin, 1999). Another very interesting observation has been made in Easter Island studies quite recently. Records of the Gonzalez Expedition of 1770 note that the sailors encountered not only these plants, but also manioc (cassava, Manihot esculenta), another American plant, growing on the Island (Langdon, 1988, 1995). Manioc is believed to have reached the Island before European Contact and testifies to America-Rapa Nui connections. However, its role and origins on the Island still need to be fully explained. Due to Easter Island’s location within the Pacific currents flowing from America, all these plants might have got there by natural means. 19 Even though we can’t rule out that Rapa Nui was first settled by Amerindians, we should still consider the possibility of contacts between the Island and South America occurring in later times. One of the strongest grounds for this assumption is to be found in the post-settlement paleobotanical record of lake-cores (1300–1450). Many new plant species, e.g. totora (Schoenoplectus californicus) and tavari (Polygonum acuminatum) appeared in this period, along with their accompanying diatoms and sponges, e.g. Meyenia sp. (Dumont et al., 1998). The fact that these plants and animals are freshwater organisms, and there are no other freshwater American migrants on the Island, leads us to assume that they were brought here by humans (Dumont et al., 1998). In some Andean traditions noted by European chronicles there are allusions to what may have been a voyage from South America to Easter Island. In the 16thcentury S. de Gamboa and C. de Balboa wrote that in the 14th century the Tupac Inca Yupanqui purportedly embarked on a year-long sea voyage (Dumont et al., 1998; de Gamboa, 2007). If this information refers to a real event, it would correlate perfectly with the paleobotanical results. Moreover, contacts were easier to establish in this way because of the geographical conditions such as winds and ocean currents (Heyerdahl, 1950; Anderson, 2006). Obviously this kind of argumentation doesn’t confirm American settlement or even a significant American influence on Rapa Nui culture, but rather incidental contacts between these regions at some point in their history (see below). There is an intriguing hypothesis of contacts going in the opposite direction, from Rapa Nui to South America. It concerns the Polynesian origin of chickens (Gallus gallus) in Chile and Peru.3 About five chicken remains were found on the El Arenal 1 site (Arauco Peninsula, Chile). Assuming that they were correctly dated (1304–1424 AD (2σ – 95%)) they would have been there about a century before the first conquistadors (Storey et al., 2007). The close relation between the DNA of the remains of these South American chickens and in chicken bones from Tonga and American Samoa (Storey et al., 2007) could be the answer to this question. Yet a number of scientists reject it, on the basis of serious methodological objections both on the grounds of archaeology (dating accuracy) and genetics (Gongora et al., 2008). Moreover it should be noted that there are 3 20 The first conquistadors encountered chicken on the Inca menu (Storey et al., 2007). Prehistory of Rapa Nui (Easter Island): A General Outline some Amazonian sites with chicken remains of unclear but certainly not Polynesian origin (Gongora et al., 2008). As we see, the arguments in support of the Heyerdahl hypothesis are not fully conclusive. The situation could have been complicated by later European influences both on Amerindians and Rapanuis, which might have distorted any original similarities and differences. Today the most widely acknowledged hypothesis is that the origin of the Easter Islanders is Polynesian (Murrill, 1968; Murray-MacIntosh et al., 1998; Martinsson-Wallin and Crockford, 2001; Hunt and Lipo, 2006), and South-East Asian and Wallacean from a longer perspective (González-Pérez et al., 2006). Usually, several different modes of migration are considered here. The first would be from the Marquesas via the Tuamotu Islands (Martinsson-Wallin and Crockford, 2001; Green and Weisler, 2002); the second from the Pitcairn Islands (Pitcairn, Henderson); and the third and last mode from the Gambier Islands (Mangareva). The second and third routes could have been used together, as they coincide for at least part of the way. Sometimes the Society Islands (Hughes, 2006) are suggested as the colonists’ place of origin. Radiocarbon and other absolute dating methods play a crucial role in the processing of the data on which we are trying to reconstruct the history of the Island’s settlement and the routes its colonists took. The palaeo-ecological record of the period after it was settled Island history is also very helpful (see below). Examined from this perspective, the Pitcairn route seems the most probable, since it would be in agreement with the oldest traces of human presence in the south-western corner of Rapa Nui. Some non-local artefacts and raw materials, such as pearl shells and fishhooks made of shells, which don’t occur in any other places on Rapa Nui, are especially relevant. You can find a lot of analogous artefacts on the nearest Pitcairn Islands and Mangareva, for example, as archaeological excavations on Henderson Island have shown (Weisler, 1998; Green and Weisler, 2002; Hunt and Lipo, 2006). The comparative method developed on the archaeological as well as on anthropological grounds provides further evidence to support the Polynesian hypothesis for the origin of the Easter Islanders. Both the social structures and material cultures (stone constructions, dwellings, sculpture, stone axes, fishhooks, sea fishing techniques, tattoos, etc.) seem to be very similar. As a matter of fact, the intensive interregional contacts in Polynesia up to 1450 have been very well 21 documented, after which date they declined and finally disappeared (Weisler, 1998; Rolett, 2002). Strong evidence based on research in the natural sciences has come from physical anthropology and genetics (e.g., Murrill, 1968; Hagelberg et al., 1994; Hagelberg et al., 1999; Lum and Cann, 2000; Lie et al., 2006). Not only human DNA, mtDNA, HLA and Y-chromosome polymorphisms have been taken into consideration, but also, equally interestingly, tissue samples from native Polynesian synanthropic animals such as, for example, the Pacific rat (Rattus exulans) have been analysed. They appear to be even more important as evidence in the light of the human demographic crisis (population bottleneck) after Contact, as well as because of admixtures of Amerindian and European genes in the Rapanui genotype (González-Pérez et al., 2006; Lie et al., 2006; Thorsby et al., 2009). The last fact often results in the inaccuracy or even unreliability of experimental results (Matisoo-Smith et al., 1998). However, the evidence on the whole now indicates that the native and first Easter Island population descended from a single lineage, which was the reason for their remarkable homogeneity (Murrill, 1968; Hagelberg et al., 1994; Stefan, 2004; González-Martin et al., 2006). The same affiliation is supported by the linguistic evidence. The Easter Island language, Rapanui, belongs to the Oceanic (Polynesian) subgroup of the Austronesian language family (Murrill, 1968; Hagelberg et al., 1999; Matisoo-Smith and Robins, 2004). The linguistic data indicate that the Rapanuis’ closest relatives were the first inhabitants of the Mangareva Islands, who spoke the Early Mangarevan dialect (Fischer, 1994; Diamond, 2005; Fischer, 2005). The similarities are to be found not only on the linguistic level, but also in the mythology, including the names of kings (chiefs): Hotu Matu’a on Rapa Nui and ‘Atu Motua on Mangareva (but see Fischer, 1994; and the discussion above). Assuming that the first colonists started from the Mangareva or Pitcairn Islands, it’s likely that they covered the distance in three weeks, as computer simulations show (Fischer, 2005; Irwin et al., 1990; Irwin, 1992). Moreover, experimental navigation could be taken as confirmation. Several projects of this sort were carried out between 1960 and1987 (on the Nālehia and the Hōkūle’a) and, more importantly, in 1999 (on the Hōkūle’a). It took the crews about seventeen and a half days to get from the Pitcairn Islands to Easter Island (Finney, 1977; Finney, 2001). Therefore it is a very plausible scenario, having in mind that sailing from another of the pro22 Prehistory of Rapa Nui (Easter Island): A General Outline posed directions, the Eastern Marquesas, could take 2–3 months. However, these experiments have met with substantial criticism based on the facts that 1) some elements of the boats were of European origin (e.g. Western-style racing sails or windward sailing: Finney, 2001; Anderson, 2006) and 2) the computer simulations were oversimplified (Finney, 2001). The former objection may be refuted because the time of the migrations was in all probability the period of ENSO (El Niño-Southern Oscillation) intensification and, consequently, the inversion of the dominant wind and direction of ocean currents in the Pacific (Anderson et al., 2006; Sáez et al., 2009). In this situation, windward sailing would not have been a necessary skill. The latter defect may be removed quite easily, as nowadays computer simulations have become much more accurate. This research and the experiments associated with it have much in common with another important discussion, of the drift voyage problem (Finney, 2001) and intentional settlement (Irwin, 1992; Finney, 2001; Fischer, 2005). It is very easy to argue that, having the advanced sailing techniques and know-how, Polynesians could have travelled from island to island not by chance as it has been supposed, but according to a well-planned strategy sparked by ecological changes (Anderson et al., 2006; Wilmshurst et al., 2010; see below). The multiple-wave colonisation4 of Rapa Nui can be observed in the genotype of the native population. DNA analysis shows that there were contacts between Tuamotu people and Rapanuis after the Pitcairn colonisation of Easter Island (Martinsson-Wallin and Crockford, 2001). Relations of the same kind with South America can be supported by a small admixture of Amerindian DNA (Martinsson-Wallin and Crockford, 2001; González-Pérez et al., 2006; Lie et al., 2006; Thorsby et al., 2009). A Polynesian influence on the culture and dialects of North Chilean (Mapuche) and South California (Chumash) Indians (Jones and Klar, 2005; Storey et al., 2007) could be taken into consideration here, but it is very hard to prove a real relationship (Anderson, 2006). For much of its history Easter Island was definitely very isolated (Barnes et al., 2006). The inhabitants of Easter Island were in contact with the islands of Polynesia for at least the first two hundred years of their history. Most probably the exchange between the islands was not so intense as in other 4 Excluding the Europeans. 23 parts of Oceania, but it was certainly important (Irwin, 1992; Weisler, 1998; Fischer, 2005). Contacts developed on the basis of food supplies, supporting population growth, or maintaining mutual relations in the event of a crisis. Gradually, the frequency of exchange between the islands declined and by the 15th century it had come to an end. In spite of this fact the people of Rapa Nui and its culture shared many common features with other Polynesian cultures. Their social structure and traditions are similar to those in other parts of Polynesia (Fischer, 2005; see Ryn in this volume). After the interregional contact had ceased, the culture of Rapa Nui began to acquire distinctive features, but only after two hundred years (the mid-15th century) did it become distinct from the core regions (Mangareva). This was when the expression Kāi-nga appeared in the local language as the name of the Island. It means simply “the territory,” as if there were no other places. According to archaeological, ethnographic, anthropological, genetic, linguistic and naturalist research the origin of the Rapanui people is Polynesian. The minor affinities with other regions, DNA admixtures and similarities in its animal and plant world are fortuitous and may be attributed to convergence, or are post-settlement and incidental, or even post-Contact. CHRONOLOGY OF EASTER ISLAND’S MATERIAL CULTURE The people who settled in Oceania in all probability came from the region now called Southern China. The first waves of proto-Polynesian colonists left the continent around 6000 BC, reaching Taiwan about 4000 BC, and Papua,5 New Ireland and New Britain about 2000 BC (Fischer, 2005). It was probably here that the Lapita Culture was created and also here that the large double-hulled canoe, their most important innovation for sea voyages, was invented. These were the vessels the Austronesian-speaking peoples would later use to reach all the islands of Polynesia, Melanesia 5 24 This was not the first settlement in this area. The first was set up about 40 ka BP and was associated with a Proto-Papuan Language population (Matisoo-Smith and Robins, 2004). Prehistory of Rapa Nui (Easter Island): A General Outline (approx. 1300 BC) and Fiji (birthplace of the Eastern Lapita Culture), Tonga and Samoa (approx. 1200 BC). Over millennia of “two-way exploratory journeys” based on celestial navigation and familiarity with ocean currents, Polynesians would colonise subsequent territories in an organised manner to form the fairly homogenous Archaic Polynesian Culture (Finney, 2001; Fischer, 2005). At one time it was believed that about 300 AD, after 3000 km of navigation on the open sea, the first groups of Polynesians reached the Marquesas Islands. At the same time, other groups of settlers were supposed to have landed in New Zealand and Hawaii. It was assumed that by the late fourth century AD the only areas still uninhabited were the eastern part of the Tuamotu Archipelago, the Gambier Islands (Mangareva) and the Pitcairn Islands (Irwin, 1992). Today, new findings have altered this scenario quite radically. According to current research, the first colonists appeared on Fiji, Tonga and Samoa about 850 BC. The Cook, Society, Marquesas and Hawai’i Islands were not settled until 800 AD, and New Zealand not until 1200 AD (Spriggs and Anderson, 1993; Anderson and Sinoto, 2002; Hunt and Lipo, 2006; Petchey et al., 2011). This is a very important change in what we know, which pushes the dates of colonisation about 500–900 years forward (sic!) and of course it affects the discussion about the first settlement of Rapa Nui. The discussion started from the analysis of local myths and legends (e.g., Métraux, 1957; Lipo and Hunt, 2009). The research project carried out by the Norwegian Archaeological Expedition (1955–1956) led by Thor Heyerdahl was a huge advance. There were several archaeologists, such as W. Mulloy, C. Smith, E. Ferdon i A. Skjřlsvold, in this group. They conducted research at Vinapu I and II, and Sites I at the A Kivi, and Tahai I sites (Ayres, 1979b). Their final result yielded the first scientific chronology and proposed dating for the ahu and moai architecture. The latter was accomplished thanks to several 14C dates from the excavations. The oldest ones are 400 AD (K-502) and were obtained from the Pōike Ditch (Martinsson-Wallin and Crockford, 2001), and 318±25 AD from a totora found in a grave at Vinapu I (Golson, 1965). Three other readings brought later dates: in a dwelling (1526±100 AD; from the hearth), in a burial ground (1629±150 AD; from a bone fragment) and again in the Pōike Ditch (about 1676 AD, K-501) (Golson, 1965; Lipo and Hunt, 2009). On this basis, the prehistory of the Island was divided into three consecutive periods: Early (>400–1100 AD), Middle (1100–1680) and Late 25 (1680–1868). According to the authors, these are noticeable above all in the changes of ahu construction techniques (Golson, 1965).6 In the first stage the ahu was believed to have been constructed of well-matched stone blocks. This method disappeared over time (according to Heyerdahl it deteriorated) and the stone blocks were only roughly worked or formed (Machowski, 1969). At that time, the platforms were primarily adapted to carry the weight of the moai statues, which were placed on top. In the final phase, the statues were destroyed, which is identified with the period of inter-clan war. At the same time, the ahu were covered with pebbles, and turned into so-called semi-pyramidal ahu, used mostly for funeral purposes (Golson, 1965). The truth is that the Early Period was poorly defined because the excavations did not reach down to those layers. The Middle Period is usually linked to the moai building phase. The beginning of the Late Period is defined as the first battle between the Long Ears and Short Ears in the Pōike Ditch. It is the time when the semi-pyramidal mounds were built and ends with the European missions and the cessation of the ahu burial tradition (Golson, 1965). Very soon after these data were published and interpreted in this way (1961–1962), they were subjected to very detailed and factual critique (see Golson, 1965). First of all, the research was criticised for conclusions that went too far and lacked corroboration in the results of the excavations. The archaeological methodology was very reliable, but did not reveal the whole profile of any of the sites. The researchers concentrated only on the upper (most recent) layers (Golson, 1965). The other allegations concerned the overgeneralisation of results obtained from a very limited area (Golson, 1965; Ayres, 1979b; Martinsson-Wallin, 1998). The suggestion of breaks between the proposed Periods seems unwarranted, too. It is worth recalling that Heyerdahl assumed the complete depopulation of the Island between the Early and Middle Periods (according to him, this was when the American population that built ahu in the Tiwanaku style was supposed to have disappeared). A more detailed analysis of the archaeological layers and all the vestiges of material culture shows a continuous use of ahu platforms and the remarkable homogeneity of the culture (Golson, 1965). 6 26 Only the first and penultimate date in the whole chronology was based on radiocarbon dating. Prehistory of Rapa Nui (Easter Island): A General Outline Contemporary research has cast doubt on practically all the radiocarbon dates too,7 indicating important factors which could have caused distortions (Lipo and Hunt, 2009). Between 1986 and1988 another important archaeological project was carried out. The earliest settlement traces were discovered on the ‘Anakena sites, (820±140 to 1050±120 AD) and were found to be well ahead of the ahu construction period (Martinsson-Wallin and Crockford, 2001). Unfortunately the results of the1991 excavations led by P. Vargas, which could bring some new data to this discussion, have still not been published. The obsidian hydration dates should be treated with great caution (Spriggs and Anderson, 1993; Rogers, 2010). However, because most of the nearly 2,400 results from Rapa Nui give the age as more recent than 1100 (Hunt and Lipo, 2008), they could be taken into consideration as confirmation of the hypothesis presented below. The key problem here seems to be the absolute dating, also because attempts to make typological chronologies have not been very successful (see below). 19 radiocarbon dates were obtained by C. Smith during the Norwegian expedition. However, as these and many other dates have stirred a lot of controversy, it is not surprising that calls to revise the chronology proposed 50 years ago on their basis are being published in the scientific literature. The first controversial date (K-502), the basis for the long chronologies of human settlement on the Island, was originally evaluated in very large ranges 384–664 cal AD (Hunt and Lipo, 2006) or 320–670 cal AD (2σ – 95%) and incorrectly averaged to 400 AD (Martinsson-Wallin and Crockford, 2001). It was first challenged some time ago, not least because of another sample taken in very close proximity in the middle of the Pōike Ditch (K-501) that gave the date of 1460–1817 cal AD (2σ – 95%) (Martinsson-Wallin and Crockford, 2001; Lipo and Hunt, 2009). Moreover, the latter value correlates much better with the local legend of the Pōike Ditch battle between the Long Ears and the Short Ears in the 17th century (but see below). The contamination of the large samples taken for radiocarbon dating by organic matter of different ages could have been the cause of these mistakes and inaccuracies (Hunt and Lipo, 2006). It is clear that the discussion involves not only the date of settlement but also all the other important events that have occurred on Rapa Nui. 7 14 C calibration was not conducted at that time. 27 Inspired by the growing wave of interest, the critical article Early Settlement of Rapa Nui (Easter Island) (Martinsson-Wallin and Crockford, 2001) appeared in 2001. Its authors, applying a “hygienic” analysis of about 120 radiocarbon dates, suggested that the settlement of Rapa Nui occurred around 800–1200 AD. They claimed that all the dates older than 800 were incorrect for various objective and methodological reasons. Moreover, they indicated that of three dates older than 400 AD, even the authors who reported them discarded two as unreliable. The third one (mentioned above) had a vast margin of error, which practically eliminated it from consideration. There were only four dates between 400 and 800: from the ahu at Tahai I (500–1050; other dates from this site were later), from the ahu at Vinapu II (600–1250, from the Rano Kau dwelling (450–1250 A, all other dates from the site were later) and from the early layers of the ‘Anakena site (650–1150) (Martinsson-Wallin and Crockford, 2001). Since charcoal was used for all the analyses, these dates should be treated with caution, because this material often comes from driftwood. This brings a risk that the layers may be over-dated as a consequence of the old wood error, as well as marine contamination and the reservoir effect. Taking into the consideration these and other reservations, the authors noted that the only reliable dates were around 800–1200 (Martinsson-Wallin and Crockford, 2001). Five years later, when awareness of the over-dating of many of the cultural phenomena on Rapa Nui had still not become well-established, the next important article appeared in the renowned journal Science. It had a telling, quasi-polemic title, Late Colonisation of Easter Island (Hunt and Lipo, 2006). Its authors put forward an even more radical hypothesis concerning the settlement of Easter Island on the basis of a precise analysis of the earlier radiocarbon dates and, more importantly, their own archaeological excavations (the 2004–2005 Expedition on ‘Anakena Dune Site) and eight new radiocarbon dates. The ‘Anakena Dune Site is one of oldest on the Island. It has the best preserved and longest (approx. 3.5 m) sequence of layers. The lowest layer with traces of human activity contains large amounts of animal remains. The high percentage of sea animals (mammals (e.g. pinnipeds, turtles, and fish) is worthy of notice because it is additional evidence of its age. The Rapanui menu changed with time, containing less and less sea food (see below). 28 Prehistory of Rapa Nui (Easter Island): A General Outline As all of the eight new datings indicate1200 AD, the authors prudently propose that Easter Island was settled after 1050 and most probably between 1050 and 1150, which tallies with the dates for the earliest Mangareva sites (Hunt and Lipo, 2006; Hunt and Lipo, 2008). Their argumentation is reinforced by the observation of the first signs of anthropo-pressure on the Island, which appear about 1200, and escalate after 1300 (Hunt and Lipo, 2008). From this perspective, the espousal of an earlier chronology would mean practically no human influence on the ecosystem for over 400 years (Hunt and Lipo, 2006), which would be highly unlikely, as there is no scenario of this kind in any other region or even archaeological site in the world. Very recently another text been published with an analysis of 1434 radiocarbon dates from all over Polynesia (Wilmshurst et al., 2010). According to its authors’ findings, populations from Samoa and Tonga settled all the Polynesian archipelagos to the Society and Gambier Islands between 1025–1120. A second wave of colonists reached all the other parts of Polynesia in a very short time, between 1200 and 1290). It was precisely this second phase of migration that colonised New Zealand (1230– 1282) and Easter Island (1200–1253). A review of the scientific literature shows a recent tendency to re-date archaeological sites in all of Polynesia. This new picture of Polynesian prehistory concurs with the striking genetic, linguistic and cultural homogeneity of the region and especially its eastern part, which has been studied continuously since the beginning of scientific research (Hagelberg, 1994). A phenomenon known as the founder effect, the consequence of a small parental population settling a new territory in a short spell of time, is clearly visible from this perspective (Murray-MacIntosh et al., 1998). Colonisation at such a rapid rate and resembling Martin’s hypothesis for the colonisation of North America (“Blitzkrieg and overkill”: Fagan, 2004), was caused by several factors: a population explosion, purposeful exploration, new sailing inventions such as windward sailing, and global climatic and environmental changes (Wilmshurst et al., 2010), which brought famine and disasters, prompting migration (Perry and Hsu, 2000). The 13th and 14th centuries marked the beginning of the Little Ice Age (Cronin, 1999), and by ENSO forcing in the Pacific around 1200–1300 (Anderson et al., 2006). One of the characteristics of this phenomenon is the emergence of westerly winds, which means a reversal of the usual 29 direction. In this situation, eastward journeys by sea are possible, much easier and faster. Perhaps this was the primary cause of migration (Wilmshurst et al., 2010), in which case the windward sailing innovation would have been unnecessary. Moreover, computer simulations and experiments show that the observed fast colonisation would not have been possible to explain by drift voyages (Irwin et al., 1990; Finney, 2001; Anderson et al., 2006). The ENSO-related droughts and fires could also have encouraged the people of Oceania to venture on organised, purposeful searches for new habitable lands (Anderson et al., 2006). The depopulation of several islands at this particular time could have been the effect of these movements (Irwin, 1992; Anderson, 2002; Fischer, 2005). All these conclusions mean an essential change in the chronology of Easter Island’s cultural history. The date of first settlement is being continually moved forward with new research. According to contemporary scenarios, the Rapanuis, just like others Polynesians, started to erect their ceremonial architecture almost immediately after landing. The human ecological impact is promptly visible, too (see below). Reconstruction of the successive settlement and exploitation phases is problematic because of very complicated local stratigraphy for the last 1000 years and dating errors (Rull et al., 2010). However, as the Island is quite small, and confirmed early dates from different sites tend to be coherent (Mieth and Bork, 2005; Hunt and Lipo, 2006; Lipo et al., 2010), it may be assumed with only a small margin of error that the coastal part of Rapa Nui was settled within 50–100 years from the date of the first landing. The very fertile but at the same time steep Pōike (Hill) Peninsula on the east was settled around 1200. The group living there was the only one isolating itself off from the others. They did not use Rano Raraku tuff to carve moai, they even dug a special ditch (the Pōike Ditch) separating the peninsula off from the rest of the territory. Notwithstanding such behaviour, the population re-emigrated around 1500 to the west and north due to a decline in the fertility of the land. Contact with Amerindians, or at least with the American plants, was a very important episode. According to different opinions, it occurred between 1000 and 1100 (Fischer, 2005) or, more probably, between 1300 and 1450 (Dumont et al., 1998; Storey et al., 2007). The sweet potato (kumara) and the bottle gourd (hue) came to Rapa Nui along with the American newcomers, or perhaps on their own by natural means. Thanks 30 Prehistory of Rapa Nui (Easter Island): A General Outline to their modest ecological requirements (e.g. for humidity) and high nutrient assets, both plants spread very quickly around all of Polynesia from Hawaii to New Zealand, very often becoming the local staple food. The hypothesis linking the possible Amerindian visit to Rapa Nui with a crisis (Rull et al., 2010) is interesting, but up to now no convincing scientific evidence has been produced for it (see below). The interior of Easter Island (the uplands) remained unused only for a very short period of time. There is no agreement among researchers as to whether this was because of the dense forest cover or because the population had no need to establish fields and dwellings there (Rull et al., 2010 for discussion). However, by the end of the 13th century, cultivation, dwellings and settlements began to spread in this area. This settlement would continue at least to 1550 (Louwagie et al., 2006). Unfortunately, there is not much more we can say about the periodisation of Easter Island on scientific grounds. The crisis or, according to others, the collapse of the Rapa Nui culture (Diamond, 2005) provokes equally important and vigorous discussion on its chronology. In the literature, the year 1680 is generally accepted as the beginning of this process. The key phrase here is “generally accepted as.” Recently two American scientists undertook a very detailed bibliographical review in an attempt to answer why this particular date should be accepted as the “pivotal point in the prehistory of Rapa Nui” (Lipo and Hunt, 2009). During their inquiry, it turned out that the first and, in fact, the most important factor was the local oral tradition. It holds that near the Pōike Peninsula, on the Pōike Ditch, the Long Ears and the Short Ears began a war which eventually led to decimation. S. Englert was the first to cite 1680 as the date of the battle on the basis of this lore, genealogical calculations and the assumption that it began before Roggeveen (1722) (La Tierra de Hotu Matu‘a, Santiago de Chile: Editorial Universitaria, 1948). The Norwegian Expedition’s 14C date (K-501, 1676 AD) from the layers of Pōike Ditch appeared to provide full confirmation. In addition the discovery that there were no mata’a8 on the Island before the 17th century made it possible for Ferdon and Smith to endorse it as correct and make it part of the grounds for their new chronology of Rapa Nui. Accordingly, 1680 came to mark the boundary between the Middle and Late Periods, and for 8 Obsidian tools resembling stemmed points. 31 decades was treated as established in almost all the papers and books (Machowski, 1969; Flannery, 1995; McMichael, 2001; Diamond, 2005; Fischer, 2005; Nagarajan, 2006; and many others). Nonetheless, it is not even clear if the “collapse” began before or after Contact (Lipo and Hunt, 2009). Neither the oral tradition nor the legends specify this in any way. Against the common conception that most or all of the moai were knocked down and crushed during the fighting, the first Dutchmen to arrive saw them still standing, and the last ones persisted to the 19th century (Machowski, 1969; Rainbird, 2002; Lipo and Hunt, 2009). Moreover the calibration of the key d <1600->1726 AD with 1σ (standard deviation), and 1460–1817 AD with 2σ, which is so widely dispersed that its contribution to the discussion is negligible (Lipo and Hunt, 2009). There are several archaeological reasons attesting to social changes on Rapa Nui during the period when the Ahu Tongariki was constructed. Some authors say that since this structure, the biggest on the Island, was built on the base of some older and smaller ones, it could be the proof of clan consolidation (Cristino and Vargas, 2002). The newest findings on marae development in Polynesia could be an additional argument in this discussion. On the basis of very accurate thorium-230 dating, the authors confirm that a very intensive construction episode occurred around 1620– 1760 and then trailed off (Sharp et al., 2010). Incidentally, the last date is very close to one of the extremes of the calibrated K-501 radiocarbon dates. This means that reports from previous expeditions (especially the Norwegian Archaeological Expedition of 1955–56) have to be reconsidered and new archaeological work is absolutely necessary. Detailed excavations of Rapa Nui cave archaeological sites would be very helpful in this discussion too, because it turns out that use of the caves during the so-called “crisis” period is in fact poorly documented (Lipo and Hunt, 2009). Their function as places of refuge was described by European explorers and travellers (Machowski, 1969) and then reproduced in the literature in fact without any archaeological evidence. All we know is that natives “disappeared underground” (Métraux, 1957; Machowski, 1969), that cave entrances were slung-back and masked, and that precious objects and ancestors’ remains were collected there (Golson, 1965). However, as yet there has been no clear proof of their defensive and residential function. First of all, concealed and protected entrances and the installation of symbolic and protective aku-aku representations nearby could be 32 Prehistory of Rapa Nui (Easter Island): A General Outline evidence that the caves were primarily used as storage or hiding places of a ceremonial or religious nature, rather than defence structures. Moreover, very narrow and sometimes contorted tunnel entrances are also found in the surface dwellings (Ferdon, 1979). And finally, it is well documented that in post-Contact times local people lived on the surface, while in the caves they only accumulated heirlooms and capital assets (Heyerdahl, 1979). It was strictly forbidden for all strangers to enter these places (see below). Unfortunately, to this day no precise typological chronology has been proposed for Easter Island. The main reason is obviously the aceramic character of Easter Island’s Polynesian culture (Anderson, 2002). Only a rather general ahu typology (Golson, 1965; Ayres, 1979b), and a better, but still not very detailed, fishhook classification (Ayres, 1979a) have been proposed. The chronological aspect of the latter appears in the well-known local myth, according to which at the beginning of their history Rapa Nui fishermen used only stone fishhooks. But this kind of tool brought only very meagre results. One day Tira-kora, the guardian spirit of the fishermen, visited one of the youngsters and advised him to make a fishhook from his father’s bone. This innovation led to much more efficient fishing. Unfortunately, he kept his strategy secret, provoking the odium of others who finally discovered it and killed him (Machowski, 1969). The new fishing tackle became widespread and we can suspect that the raw material for fishhooks changed over time. Already the first Easter Island archaeologists turned their attention to the problem of fishhook (rou) typology and chronology (Métraux, 1957). The temporal variability of both the raw material and shape of these tools were noticed very early (Ayres, 1979a). However, a certain conservatism due to raw material constraints may also be observed on Rapa Nui just as, for example, on Pitcairn. The basic materials for rou production were bone (including human bone), stone and wood. Shells, very common on other Polynesian islands, are too small on Rapa Nui to make a working fishhook. The rare examples of shell rou from the Island are imports, and at the same time serve as signs of interregional contacts. The oldest fishhooks on Easter Island come from the 13th century, which agrees with the most recently proposed dating for settlement. Of all Rapa Nui rou the two-piece items are the most interesting specimens. They are also known from Hawaii (and from the California Chumash), but the Rapanui are very distinctive in form and construction, which is inter33 preted as evidence of their local origin (Ayres, 1979a). In the beginning, stone was the basic raw material for fishhooks. The surprising use of this material was probably due to the absence on the Island of shells big enough for the job. They are very often two-piece implements. The dimensions of these tools are quite large – up to 93.1 mm – and they were probably used for offshore fishing. With time, the length of the hooks decreased (to 31–33 mm) and the material changed to bone (human, whale, bird, chicken or seal). This trend is directly connected with the technological parameters of bone (Ayres, 1979a). These fishhooks were probably used for inshore fishing. The mythological information is clearly very coherent with archaeological testimonials. Finally, it is worth mentioning that after Contact, metal became the most common material for fishhook production. Since the beginning of Rapa Nui research in the 20th century scientists have been observing the changing sequence of architectural trends (Golson, 1965; Ayres, 1979b). The ahu were the first structures to be erected, later they were rebuilt so that the moai could be placed on top of them. Ultimately the statues were knocked down and broken. Irving Goldman in his study Ancient Polynesian Society (Chicago and London, 1970) notes that the changes in the social comportment may reflect changes in social authority: “military chiefs had begun to replace the exclusive authority of a religious ariki” (Goldman quoted in Fischer, 2005:34). Today we know that the development of Rapa Nui culture was not a simple, one-dimensional process. There are opinions that we cannot be sure if the three phases proposed can and should be identified, especially in the context of the short chronology. Some claim that there was no single episode of moai destruction, but that the statues could have been destroyed one by one as the respective chiefs changed (Anderson, 2002). We should remember that the first Europeans (for example Roggeveen) observed that only some of the statues had been knocked down, and witnessed the statue cult (Rainbird, 2002). Almost a hundred years later some of the moai were still in good condition and standing in place (Machowski, 1969; Lipo and Hunt, 2009), which may indicate that they were destroyed gradually and the process escalated after the Europeans landed on the Island. There is also a controversial and so far poorly documented idea that an earthquake destroyed the statues (Hunt and Lipo, 2009). Whether or not we accept this hypothesis, we need a new way of thinking about the phases in ceremonial building on Easter Island. Amendment 34 Prehistory of Rapa Nui (Easter Island): A General Outline is required, since new chronologies of the Island’s history have been developed. If Rapa Nui was populated around 1200, and there is more and more evidence for that, the concept of the so-called Early Period (400/800– 1100 according to Smith and Ferdon) can no longer be sustained. In this case, the history of the Island would have started with the Middle Period (1100–1680, according to Smith and Ferdon), which would be the moai construction period. This requires either new dating of the moai construction period (for example 1300–1550, as proposed by Stevenson and Haoa, 1999; Van Tilburg et al., 2008) or accepting that both the ahu and moai were constructed at the same time (1200–1250). It is also quite possible that the period of intense building activity was much later (1620–1760). New studies of other Polynesian marae complexes seem to support this thesis (Sharp et al., 2010). Unfortunately the data available today do not allow us to solve those problems. One of the newest proposals for artefact typology is for the mata’a – very distinctive, stemmed obsidian tools (Lipo et al., 2010). For a long time, on the grounds of the first explorers’ reports, the mata were regarded as combat appliances (there was no game to hunt on the Island) imbedded on shafts. It was assumed that they appeared in the archaeological and ethnographic record only during the war period (Smith and Ferdon’s Late Period). However, traceological analysis shows that they were tools used mostly for plant harvesting and cutting. The cutting edge was on the side or on the distal part of the artefact, while its shape was purely functional (Lipo et al., 2010). Minor variability in stem form is observed. It is too early for chronological conclusions, but according to the authors it could testify to the existence of “relatively autonomous social groups,” instead of one chiefdom (Lipo et al., 2010). This vital traceological observation prompts us to discard the unequivocal association of the mata with military conflicts. The hydration dates on these tools, indicating the 1550–1800 period (Hunt and Lipo, 2008), cannot be a clinching argument. The connection between the mata and other cultural changes on the Island is still not clear. It is equally possible that the Vinapu clan, which controlled the obsidian resources, began a more intensive form of barter for food in this period, which coincides with the time when the upland fields were abandoned. Moreover, 1550– 1650/1700 was the apogee of moai production and erection, and thus a period of increasing demand for food production. Hence the mata could have served equally for agriculture or fighting, or for both. 35 To conclude all these remarks, it appears that some changes appeared on Rapa Nui during the 17th and 18th century. However, their nature is not completely clear to us today. Some new data could be derived from ecological research, which is discussed below. THE ECOLOGY OF RAPA NUI The climate of Rapa Nui is fairly moderate (approx. 18–24°C) and humid (1350–2000 mm/year) due to its subtropical location (27°S) and area (162 km2) (see Murrill, 1968; Stevenson et al., 2006; Ryn in this volume). It is very much like the climate of Brisbane (Australia), Okinawa or Midway (Hughes, 2006). However, from time to time there are periods of drought (500–900 mm/year), which makes for low environmental predictability (Stevenson et al., 2006; Horrocks and Wozniak, 2008). Frequent and strong winds are salient contributing factors to the Island’s climate, causing evapotranspiration and transporting salt-spray (Hunt, 2007). Because of their volcanic origin the soils are quite fertile, but challenging to manage (Louwagie et al., 2006; Nagarajan, 2006; Paulo, Ryn, this volume). There is an opinion in the literature that on Rapa Nui global climate changes were significantly mitigated by the influence of the ocean. Because of its geological history and isolation, Easter Island is one of the most ecologically impoverished of the Pacific islands (Hunt, 2007). After many years of biological research, it is clear today that the majority of the 48 Rapanui plant species come from South-Eastern Asia and other Pacific islands (Fisher, 2005; Horrocks and Wozniak, 2008). At least 14 arrived with the first colonists (Hunt, 2007). However, one of the principal forest plants was the endemic toromiro tree (Sophora toromiro), with its edible fruit (Dumont et al., 1998; Hughes, 2006). It disappeared from the local flora in the mid-20th century (Anderson, 2002). The second typical tree was burweed (Triumfetta semitriloba) (Rull et al., 2010), but the most important and at the same time best known was the palm Jubaea chilensis. It was probably a Chilean migrant which reached the island about 30,000 BP (Mieth and Bork, 2010). Other scientists speculate, however, that it is a Rapanui endemic and call it Paschalococos disperta; still others claim that Juania australis from Juan Fernández Island was the parent species (Dransfield et al., 1984; Rull et al., 2010). It is one of the world’s 36 Prehistory of Rapa Nui (Easter Island): A General Outline tallest palms, growing to a maximum height of 20 m, and a 2 m diameter. Most specimens are 10 m high with a 0.5 m trunk. The tree and its fruit have played the same role on the Island as the coconut palms in other parts of Polynesia (Mieth and Bork, 2010), which did not colonise Rapa Nui because of its windy climate. According to one hypothesis, these trees formed a complex of very dense tropical forests of about 16 billion trees (Mieth and Bork, 2010). However, this claim prompts several questions. The hypothesis is viable only if all the described plant pollens are local. This might hold, considering the fact that on the small Isla Salas y Gómez the palynological profiles are far less rich than on Easter Island (Rull et al., 2010). However, the absence of contemporary analogies of similar forests could be a problem. Moreover, almost all the botanical samples examined for Rapa Nui so far have come from the coast, from the archaeological sites or from the vicinity of lakes (Sáez et al., 2009; Rull et al., 2010). Hence we may assume that these palynological studies represent the ecology of the coast, the changes around settlements and hydrological balance around the lakes, and it is incorrect to apply them to the whole Island (Rull et al., 2010). The palm gallery forest growing in the humid and non-agricultural areas (Rull et al., 2010) or patchwork biotopes could be a probable landscape reconstruction, too. If, however, the dense tropical forest hypothesis is to be upheld, we have to ask where the charcoal from these 16 billion trees is. It is known that the palms were used as fuel and perhaps for boat construction (although it is not the best material for this). It was also used for ahu and moai transportation and construction, which should have left traces in the archaeo-botanical sequences. The discovery of 20 new tree species on Rapanui archaeological sites has only increased the doubts arising from this hypothesis (Hunt, 2007; Rull et al., 2010). As there is no pollen, only charcoal, it is possible that only the wood was brought to the Island but the trees were never grown here (Rull et al., 2010). Whatever the reason, this should be taken into consideration when discussing Easter Island’s forest economy. Numerous herbaceous plants came to the Island together with the settlers. One of the most important is totora (Scirpus riparius), originating from South America and called nga’ahu by Rapanuis. This cane was used extensively in raft-boat making and plaiting. Several new tree species were imported to Rapa Nui in the mid-19th century by European colonisers. 37 These were eucalyptus (Eucalyptus globulosus) and acacia. Most of them are only 40–60 years old and originate from South America. Beside these trees, approximately 160 introduced species were brought here on consecutive visits (Hughes, 2006; Horrocks and Wozniak, 2008). An important aspect of the animal world of Rapa Nui are the endemic fish species of its inshore waters. However, they are not as numerous as on other Polynesian islands because there is no coral reef around Rapa Nui (Hughes, 2006). In the off-shore waters there are dolphins, whales and seals. The absence of local land mammals and the scarcity of insects, spiders and land snails are very significant (Hughes, 2006). Before human settlement, large colonies of birds lived on Easter Island, with endemic flightless birds among them (Dumont et al., 1998). There are also barn owls, doves, pigeons, rails, parrots and herons (Hughes, 2006). All of them are known only from archaeo-zoological material, since they were extinct long before the European visits. The direct causes were probably the disappearance of the trees (or forests) and the arrival of synanthropic Pacific rats (Hughes, 2006). Quite large populations of sea birds like petrels, boobies, albatrosses, frigates, tropical terns and many others have survived. However, they nest only on offshore islets like Motu Iti and Motu Nui. The scarcity of land fauna is related to the isolation of Rapa Nui. The first land mammals were brought here by humans. They are the Pacific rat (Rattus exulans), 9 the chicken (Gallus gallus) 10 and the gecko lizard. The first two were common food items and were usually taken by Polynesians on their voyages (Mieth and Bork, 2010). Interestingly, there are no traces of pigs (Sus sp.) or dogs (Canis familiaris) in the Rapa Nui inventory, so characteristic for Polynesian settlers (Matisoo-Smith et al., 1998; Matisoo-Smith and Robins, 2004). Some scientists suggest that they were eaten up very quickly before they could be established (Murrill, 1968), but we have no archaeo-zoological proof of this scenario. Some new edible plants were brought to Easter Island by humans. They were the staple foods: taro (Colocasia esculenta), yam (Dioscorea alata) known as ‘uhi, sugar cane (Saccharum officinarum) known as toa, and banana (Musa sapientum) known as maika (Horrocks and Wozniak, 2008). 9 10 38 Interestingly, this animal, which cannot swim, is one of the most widely distributed rats in the world. The provenience of chicken is discussed later in this essay. Prehistory of Rapa Nui (Easter Island): A General Outline In addition, the settlers brought ti (Cordyline fruticosa), the coconut palm (Cocos nucifera) and breadfruit (Artocarpus altilis), which didn’t survive because of the windy climate (Murrill, 1968). Some important South American plants were probably brought by humans too: the sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas), the bottle gourd (Lagenaria siceraria), manioc (Manihot utilissima) and turmeric (Curcuma longa). Particularly the sweet potato spread throughout all of Polynesia very quickly, adapting to climatic conditions, such as those of New Zealand, that were very different from its motherland (Hughes, 2006). Despite the mild climate and rains, there are only a few freshwater sources on Rapa Nui. Today there are no permanent streams, and the water table is very low (Murrill, 1968). Originally some small creeks could have crossed the Island’s forests, but they disappeared with advancing deforestation. There are only three lakes located in calderas (Rano Raraku, Rano Aroi, Rano Kau), marshes and underground water. Most of the marshlands are along the coast, which explains their brackish (but potable) water. The underground water sources in caves are better, but they have limited accessibility because of taboos and property rights. However, this water can be tapped by wells. There are no traces of large faunal or floral extinctions on Easter Island during the Holocene (Fischer, 2005). However, the Rapanui environment had several limitations that lowered its applications a priori. The main constraints are the isolation, windiness with its risk of evapotranspiration and salt-spray diffusion, high precipitation and moisture changes connected with the subtropical ocean climate, and shallow, well drained soils (Louwagie et al., 2006; Hunt, 2007). It was a fragile, but stable ecosystem, undisturbed before human settlement. When the first Rapanuis came to the Island it was at least partially covered by forests and full of birds. Some authors write that it could have resembled Eden (e.g., Diamond, 2005). Today, however, it would be more appropriate to call this territory a marginal habitat. Probably from the very beginning it was quite hard to live here, since edible plants were not available, nor were animals, except for wildfowl (Rainbird, 2002). In the first years of colonisation horticulture was the dominant style of agriculture (Stevenson et al., 2006), but settlers extended the range very soon (from about 1244–1299), probably as the forest were being cleared (Horrocks and Wozniak, 2008). From 1250 to 1520 this system of land 39 cultivation spread throughout the Island (Mieth and Bork, 2010). According to the latest claims, the first forest clearances could not be dated to 1000, as had been suggested by the Rano Kau lake-cores analysis. Both the methodology and accuracy of these studies appear to lack credibility (Hunt and Lipo, 2008). Today all the pollen profile analyses from different parts of Rapa Nui indicate 1250–1300 as the beginning of forest slash (Hunt and Lipo, 2006; Hunt and Lipo, 2008; Mann et al., 2008; Mieth and Bork, 2010). The first bones of Pacific rats and Jubaea nuts partially eaten by them appeared more or less at the same time in the archaeo-zoological record (Hunt and Lipo, 2008). The first hypothesis of a postulated rapid deforestation said that it was the consequence of exploitative agriculture and the construction of monumental ceremonial architecture (ahu and moai) (Stevenson and Haoa, 1999; Diamond, 2005; Rallu, 2007; Croix and Dottori, 2008; Rull et al., 2010). Today this hypothesis is very difficult to defend in the light of statistical estimates of how many trees were necessary for transportation in the construction (2 palms/year) and the fact that they might have been reused (Rainbird, 2002). Moreover, Easter Island palms were not a particularly good material for canoe construction (Hunt and Lipo, 2009). Last but not least, there remains the rhetorical question: Why couldn’t the Rapanuis, like all the others Polynesians, have practised agro-forestry, for which extensive forest slash was not necessary (Rainbird, 2002)? In this discussion, a climatological argument is also used. It is known that a very dry climatic episode occurred several decades or centuries before 1180–1290 (Flenley, 1979; Mann et al., 2008; Sáez et al., 2009). Crucially, droughts were observed precisely in this period (900–1100), in Chile and Patagonia too (Mann et al., 2008). The forests of Rapa Nui could have dwindled away at that time, well before human settlement. Droughts were of course possible at later stages in the Island’s history, but they are hard to prove due to the very complicated and unclear stratigraphic situation over the past1000 years (Flenley, 1979; Mann et al., 2008; Rull et al., 2010). However, the climatic hypothesis of deforestation looks feeble. First of all, the dry episode occurred long before human settlement on Rapa Nui. Moreover, it did not influence any Polynesian islands except Tasmania (Flenley, 1979; Mann et al., 2008; Rull et al., 2010). As new analyses of lake-cores from Rano Raraku have shown, the dry episode lasted 4.2–0.8 cal kyr BP i.e. no longer than to 1150. While it is true that this was before 40 Prehistory of Rapa Nui (Easter Island): A General Outline the Island’s colonisation (1200), it does not exclude natural reforestation, probably connected with a subsequent wetter period (Sáez et al., 2009). The Medieval Warm Period (900–1200) was cool and dry in the Pacific region, but the Little Ice Age was warm, wet and stormy (Allen, 2006). Finally, some scientists emphasise that for a long time in its history Easter Island was beyond ENSO influence and neither afflicted by intense storms nor visited by droughts (Allen, 2006). According to another hypothesis neither man nor the climate was responsible for Rapanui deforestation, but the blame lies with the kiore – the Pacific rat (Rattus exulans). This animal arrived on the Island with the first humans. Its population increased dramatically just as it did elsewhere, and by feeding on the Jubaea nuts it must have stopped the natural process of tree reproduction. As this tree species was being felled to excess, deforestation occurred very quickly (Fischer, 2005; Hunt and Lipo, 2006, 2009; Hunt, 2007). The authors indicate that there are other examples of this scenario on other Pacific islands, e.g. in Hawaii (Hunt, 2007). However, this very attractive hypothesis has several weak points. Recently it has been heavily criticised by Mieth and Bork (2010). They point out, for example, that only about 10% of Jubaea nuts show rat tooth-marks. Besides, they are usually found in the caves, which may indicate that they were eaten outside the natural environment and may have originally been collected by humans. Moreover, the nuts from archaeological levels do not bear rat tooth-marks. Last but not least, Mieth and Bork observe that a forest is still able to regenerate after the first cut-downs, but loses this capacity after the intensification of slash- and-burn and very extensive agriculture (or horticulture). Yet another problem with this hypothesis is the fact that, paradoxically, nut-gnawing could facilitate the germination and spread of forests (Campbell and Atkinson, 2002; Rainbird, 2002). The majority of scientists, especially the proponents of catastrophic theories of the rise and collapse of Rapa Nui culture, say that the primary cause of the Island’s cultural crisis was abrupt and severe deforestation. However, except for reasonable doubts regarding the density of the original forest, there is no reason to dismiss the first European descriptions of the Rapa Nui flora. The very first European sailor on Easter Island, Jacob Roggeveen, noted in 1722 that “the island was full of trees” (Roggeveen fide Palmer, 1870:168) and more than 145 years later British explorer J.L. Palmer still described large palm trunks and several wood-crafted 41 objects (Palmer, 1870). The first to write about tree loss or scarcity was the French naturalist La Pérouse, in 1786 (Hunt and Lipo, 2009). However, all the written sources indicate that the trees were not extinct till the 18th or even 19th century (see below). This subject needs further study. The unique location of the Island rules out simple extrapolation of results from other territories. Today we are fairly certain that Easter Island’s deforestation began with human settlement, but lasted quite a long time. Following settlement other ecological changes in the avifauna and sea biocenoses could be observed. An excellent example, and at the same time an indicator of the primary character of the Rapanui economy, was described on the basis of the ‘Anakena archaeological sites (e.g. Gannet Cave). Some 6000 animal bones were found there, among them about 2500 of porpoise (Fischer, 2005). It is very significant that this particular animal disappeared from the local fauna so quickly that even the word for it has not survived in the local language. Exploitative agriculture and ecosystem impoverishment started and continued right from the beginning of colonisation. Other sea-mammals were staple foods, too, but by the 16th century overhunting caused a change of menu. Changes of this kind could be observed on other Polynesian islands, too (Martinsson-Wallin and Crockford, 2001). However, such processes are not irreversible, as has been shown by Hunt and Lipo’s research (2009; Hunt, 2007). Some decades later, sea-mammals and large fish reappeared in the archaeological record. This could be treated as one more piece of evidence against a sudden ecological disaster on Easter Island. Birds, their eggs, fish and, to a small extent, some domesticates made up the original diet of the first Rapa Nui settlers (Martinsson-Wallin and Crockford, 2001; Fischer, 2005; Hunt and Lipo, 2006). Sometimes crustaceans, molluscs and turtles were included in the diet. There is some evidence, even in the mythology (Machowski, 1969), that soon after the arrival of humans all flightless birds and land molluscs became extinct (Dumont et al., 1998). However, this has not been clarified. The archaeo-zoological data (Hunt, 2007; Hunt and Lipo, 2009) show that contrary to popular belief, wildfowl was never a staple food on Easter Island and until the 18th century its consumption was always at the same, low level. A comparative analysis of land and sea bird percentages in the Rapanui diet would be very interesting – it is possible that a quick change from flightless birds to sea species occurred soon after colonisation. The rats 42 Prehistory of Rapa Nui (Easter Island): A General Outline brought to the Island could have of course increased the extinction rate of land birds, too (Hunt and Lipo, 2009). Anthropology confirms the permanent Rapanui association with fishing and a littoral economy. Examinations clearly show a significant incidence of skeletal changes of an arthritic and tuberculosis nature and other water- dependent diseases (Murrill, 1968). The fluctuations in the character of fishing look very interesting. In the beginning, Rapanui fishermen used rods and nets, 500–1000 m offshore, for big and medium fish (e.g., tuna (Scombridae), wrasses (Labridae), and jacks (Carangidae) (Martinsson-Wallin and Crockford, 2001). This activity was controlled by groups from the west and north coasts (e.g. the Miru clan), regarded as the direct descendants of the first settlers. By the15th century long- distance offshore fishing disappeared and this kind of seafood vanished from the local diet. Inshore techniques and species; eels (Anguilliformes), groupers (Serranidae) and shellfish began to predominate (Martinsson-Wallin and Crockford, 2001; Hunt and Lipo, 2006). According to the classical theory, the observed change was the consequence of forest slash and the want of materials for boat construction. Wood became a valuable commodity, as evidenced by its name, rākan, i.e. richness, and came predominantly from driftwood (Heyerdahl, 1979). We cannot rule out that storms had an influence on offshore fishing, too (Allen, 2006). There is a patent correlation between this change and the end of frequent contact between the Polynesian islands, as well as with depopulation of some of them (e.g. Mangareva and the Pitcairn Islands in the 16th century). All these phenomena are connected with the same climate fluctuations (Irwin, 1992; Weisler, 1998; Fischer, 2005) and the modification of the agricultural economy (see below). Paradoxically, the turn of the 15th and 16th century was a period of increasing marine resources in the Rapa Nui diet. This could have been a reflection of population growth or a decrease in harvests (Fischer, 2005) caused by deforestation, degradation, aridity and soil sterilisation due to the development of upland agriculture. These arguments are not generally accepted (Hunt and Lipo, 2009). First of all, the palm tree (the biggest and most common tree on the Island) is not suitable for canoe production (but it could serve for raft-boat construction). Second, the offshore fish could be caught on inshore waters, too (there are numerous examples of this from all over Polynesia). And third, more importantly, the detailed listing of archaeo-zoological data shows that they have never disappeared 43 from the local diet (Hunt and Lipo, 2009) even though they have always been a minor component. The lowest archaeological layers at the ‘Anakena Dune Site contain the bones of Pacific rats and humans, apart from the remains of sea fauna (Hunt and Lipo, 2006). This could be evidence of the role of the rat in the Rapanui menu, which is well known from other Pacific islands and contradicts the hypothesis of the fortuitous transportation of these animals to Easter Island (Matisoo-Smith and Robins, 2004). This very fertile species was extirpated in the 17th century (Barnes et al., 2006), perhaps as a consequence of the disappearance of flightless birds, which were the rats’ food. The presence of human bones in the kitchen waste mass is sometimes interpreted as traces of cannibalism (Hunt and Lipo, 2006). The important aspect of this problem is the increasing percentage of these kinds of bones in waste mass with time (Martinsson-Wallin and Crockford, 2001), which cannot be treated only as a ritual (Murrill, 1968; Metraux, 1957; Nagarajan, 2006). Perhaps this is evidence of a very sudden food crisis or overpopulation, which society needed some time to find proper ways of dealing with. A conclusive opinion should be suspended until more traceological analyses on the human bones confirming man-eating practices are available (Hunt and Lipo, 2009). Although the human impact on ecology was profound and rapid, the definitive collapse only came after several centuries (see below). I have already said that agriculture on Easter Island was practised in the form of household gardens. They were initially located along the coast no further than 1 km from the shore, but fairly soon they were extended up to 2–3 km inland. As palynological research shows, the majority of the Island’s territory was under cultivation by the 14th century (Horrocks and Wozniak, 2008). At the same time (from 1300), upland cultivation started and would last till the 17th/18th century (Louwagie et al., 2006) i.e. till Contact time. The upland areas were farmed by “task-groups,” small 2–3 person households. The sites included Vaitea, Maunga Tari and others on the southern slopes of Maunga Terevaka. Alongside basalt tools, there were some obsidian flakes and mata’a in different stages of use. The mata’a have been described, mainly on the basis of traceological analysis, as intended for cutting, scraping, etc. but, interestingly, not for fighting (Stevenson et al., 2007). According to some authors, the upland economy was strictly connected with a rather formalised social structure and the clan 44 Prehistory of Rapa Nui (Easter Island): A General Outline elites (from at least 1300–1550). This kind of organisation gave upland farmers a surplus, which they held as a reserve for times of crop failure. It also allowed for the legitimisation of power through the building of monumental architecture. The clan and kinship system on Rapa Nui was one of the reasons for bloodless competition in ahu and later moai building (Stevenson and Haoa, 1999; Louwagie et al., 2006). Confirmation for this hypothesis comes in the fact that the crisis and collapse of this economy coincided with the crisis of chiefs – evidence that the situation was not only the consequence of a population explosion (Louwagie et al., 2006; Stevenson et al., 2007). Along with the worsening climatic conditions, environmental changes and exhaustion of the Island’s natural productivity, we can observe a proliferation of practices that were meant to stop dwindling crop yields (Louwagie et al., 2006). During the heyday of Easter Island’s society the fields were cultivated very extensively. From around 1400 crop cultivation intensified (Horrocks and Wozniak, 2008), as evidenced by the presence of natural fertilisers (Fischer, 2005). 11 Nonetheless, already by the 17th century and thereafter the area under cultivation decreased, which could reflect a decline in population, for example. This is evident in the subsequent reports of European travellers. Roggeveen informs us that only 10% of the Island was cultivated (Machowski, 1969). However, despite the significant impoverishment of the ecosystem, conditions were apparently sufficient for three days of work a year to ensure harvests that were enough for survival (Murrill, 1968). Moreover, until the early 19th century most travellers’ reports paint a rosy picture of the Island’s agriculture (Rainbird, 2002). However, deforestation and the exposure of large tracts of land to strong evapotranspiration gave rise to the practice of cultivating the more delicate plants in sunken gardens (pu) and depressions enclosed within a wall (manavai) (Hughes, 2006; Stevenson et al., 2006). This did not, however, cause the complete collapse of agriculture (Hunt and Lipo, 2009). Most typical for the Island were the so called rock gardens, ranging from one to several dozen acres (Ladefoged et al., 2010). Stones of various sizes were set up in them to reduce evaporation, prevent wind erosion and fertilise the soil. The use of mulch and other advanced agricultural tech11 Their availability fell sharply with the disappearance of more and more species of birds providing guano (Hunt and Lipo, 2009). 45 niques was widespread (Louwagie et al., 2006; Stevenson et al., 2006; Barber, 2010; Ladefoged et al., 2010). It should be noted, however, that the use of such techniques was normal practice for Polynesians (and other societies residing in marginal habitats) and most likely occurred on the Island since the mid-14th century (Hunt and Lipo, 2009). On the other hand, larger irrigation systems were never used on the Island (Stevenson et al., 2006). Also connected with climatic change was the nearly total cessation of taro and yam cultivation in favour of the less demanding sweet potato. Recent studies show, moreover, that the climate and carrying capacity of the Island are ideal for cultivating the sweet potato, but only marginal for taro and yam. (Louwagie et al., 2006). Sugar cane provided a nutritious juice that became an important dietary supplement and caused widespread tooth decay (Diamond, 2005). Some even assert that this economic change enabled the existing elite system and control of goods to be maintained for a certain amount of time (Stevenson and Haoa, 1999). Cultivation of the sweet potato ensured a sufficient surplus. One of the first groups suspected of completely degrading the territory they inhabited was the Pōike Peninsula society. This process was to begin with the clearing of trees already by around 1280, and ended after about 100–200 years (1380–1480). It was associated above all with sudden soil erosion, leading to the submergence of many places along the coast (Mieth and Bork, 2005). After 1400 the population was forced to migrate west and north beyond the peninsula. However, after another 100 years farmers once again appeared on the peninsula. Some parts of it were cultivated in 1500–1675 (Hunt, 2007). An alternative to anthropo-pressure as an explanation of these phenomena is the nature of the peninsula itself. This steep terrain, devoid of rocks, was naturally prone to rapid denudation and sudden erosion (Hunt and Lipo, 2009). We should therefore not overestimate the role of man in the changes observed. Instead, the return of cultivation to the Pōike Peninsula can be explained in connection with similar phenomena on other Polynesian islands (e.g. Mangaia in the Southern Cook Islands). Not only does erosion and the emergence of deluvial soils not preclude agriculture, but it actually creates fertile land in the foothills, an asset the natives were quick to exploit (Rainbird, 2002). Despite the lack of unambiguous evidence for an ecological disaster or a serious crisis, there is no doubt that the Island’s ecosystem was sub46 Prehistory of Rapa Nui (Easter Island): A General Outline jected to constant negative anthropogenic pressure. Perhaps changes of a global nature that were superimposed on it triggered a classic positive feedback: deforestation – rise in soil temperature – local increase in humidity – intensification of leaching and soil erosion – increase in porosity – poorer water retention – drying of the soil – death of herbaceous vegetation – further erosion (including wind erosion) – etc. In effect, by the late 17th or in the 18th century Easter Island had lost nearly all its flora and fauna and became one of the most barren islands in the Pacific.12 As Louwagie et al. (2006) write, “people were likely living at the edge of sustainability, at least periodically” (Louwagie et al., 2006:313). Examination of 17th- and 18th-century human skeletons indicates large nutritional deficiencies, evident in low levels of Fe and Ca (Fischer, 2005). That also coincides with the appearance of mo’ai kavakava figures representing men with protruding ribs, sometimes considered signs of famine. It is significant in this context that at precisely this time we observe the abandonment of upland fields, settlements and the suggested crisis of the chiefs – the existing system of elites and power (Louwagie et al., 2006). These events would most likely have coincided with wars, the memory of which has been preserved in the Island’s mythology. Anthropology also points out that armed conflicts are a typical way that the Polynesians regulated population growth (Rallu, 2007). Other cultural phenomena often associated with resource deficiencies would support such an interpretation. An example might be cannibalism (which has been described, after all, on Rapa Nui), as well as dietary and environmental taboos. It is known that, after the moai cult period, the Birdman cult appeared on Easter Island (after 1600), with its taboo on the hunting and consumption of wildfowl and their eggs (Machowski, 1969; Louwagie et al., 2006). A taboo on fishing outside the summer season has also been identified (Ayres, 1979a). There is no strong evidence yet for other regulations of this type, known in other parts of Polynesia, such as migration (impossible here for geographical and environmental reasons), infanticide, contraception or taboos in sexual behaviour. It is estimated that if the Island was settled around 900, and its population stabilised around 1600, on the assumption that it was able to feed 150 p/km2, and the founding group numbered 50 people, then the final 12 Today efforts are still being made to change the status quo (Alvarez, 2010). 47 population could have reached around 25,650 people, and the growth rate was at a level of 0.9% (Rallu, 2007). That is a very high rate, taking into account, for example, the historical data for Europe and its very large population. We find similar data and assertions in the work of many other authors, however. Hughes (2006) writes that in 1500 the population was 9000, which would give 25,000 after the next 100 years at a rate of 0.9%. McMichael (2001) estimates the population at 7,000 at the end of the 14th century, Nagarajan (2006) and de la Croix and Dottori (2008) in turn estimate it at around 10,000 in 1550, and Fischer (2005) has it at around 12,000 in the 16th century– in other words, also very similar. Shifting the time of human arrival on Rapa Nui forward 300 years introduces further changes to these calculations. One of the following should be accepted: either the final population reached a decidedly smaller figure (after 400 years it would have been merely 1,740 inhabitants), or else the growth rate was decidedly higher. In the latter case, we would have to speak of a true demographic explosion and a growth rate of 1.5–1.7% (sic!). Some researchers, however, write of a significantly lower maximum population. For example, Anderson (2002) argues that it may never have exceeded 2,000–3,000, and considers other estimates to be highly doubtful. He sees the cause of ecological disaster in climate change, rather than overpopulation, and considers war a natural element of Polynesian cultures that does not testify to any disaster. Cultural and demographic development would thus have occurred in a very stable manner from settlement until the early 18th century (at the time of Roggeveen’s arrival, the population was most likely around 2,000 individuals). According to this researcher, it was not until the 19th century that a documented population collapse appeared, in connection with contact with Europeans. The opinion of Hunt (2007) is somewhat different. The founding group (50 individuals) was to have experienced a population explosion (at a growth rate of 3.0%) and stabilised at a level of 3,000–4,000 already by 1350–1370. He defines all other views as “little more than speculation … critical to notions of ‘ecocide’” (498). He cites examples of other newly settled territories (e.g. Tikopia, where the population was steadily maintained at around 1200 individuals: Croix and Dottori, 2008), as well as the very low carrying capacity of the Island, which according to him allowed for a maximum of 20 p/km2. He admits, however, that there is no unambiguous evidence as to the size of the population (Hunt and Lipo, 2009). 48 Prehistory of Rapa Nui (Easter Island): A General Outline As all the demographic calculations are based on archaeological data (the number of dwellings, on the assumption that only 1/3 of them were used at any given time) and the abandonment of some of them is clearly visible, it is hard to agree with the estimates of Anderson and Hunt, even taking into consideration Schreiber and Kintigh’s work and reservations (1996). Researchers who postulate a large population (e.g. Rull, 2007) also cite numerous examples from other islands. We know from archaeological and archaeo-botanical data that by the mid-16th century the Island had become a grassland, and already in the 17th century its resources and productivity were being depleted or subjected to serious limitation. We can therefore readily accept 1600 as the cut-off date for demographic growth. Stabilisation, followed by population decline, was also observed at this time in other areas of Polynesia (Rallu, 2007). On Easter Island this coincided with the end of moai production, increasing inter-clan conflicts and depopulation of settlements (Fischer, 2005; Louwagie et al., 2006). These trends were connected with an authority crisis in the existing elites and chiefs, and consequently with a crisis and change of ideology (e.g. the Birdman cult). According to some, this was accompanied by an episode of “fortification,” usage of caves and the employment of mata’a as weapons (Louwagie et al., 2006), which, however, does not seem so obvious. Such a scenario, evident in the archaeological sources, is almost perfectly consistent with mathematical models proposed for a demographic growth exceeding the growth rate of resources (Basener and Ross, 2005). While we cannot speak of disaster on Rapa Nui, we are certainly dealing with a major crisis. An interesting view is expressed by de la Croix and Dottori (2008), who at the same time propose a mathematical model to confirm it. They hold that the postulated demographic explosion was connected with clan rivalry over access to resources. According to them, the numerically superior clans would have had greater chances to win the rivalry, particularly in the event of war. This would lead to over-population far in excess of the Island’s carrying capacity and, subsequently, collapse. The discussion as to whether the main cause of the crisis observed was climatic (cooling – Mann et al., 2008; drying –Anderson, 2002), or anthropogenic (Diamond, 2005; Flenley and Bahn, 2003) has still not been resolved. Incidentally, one might recall that in the literature there is also the view that a visit by Amerindians to Rapa Nui in the 15th century was 49 connected with the observed changes (Dumont et al., 1998). This topic is still so vague and poorly documented that it can hardly be considered seriously. It is thus not so obvious whether Flannery’s model could have been achieved in the classic manner on Rapa Nui: settlement – intensifying exploitation and demographic explosion – filling of the entire biotope – environmental degradation (anthropogenic and climatic) – conflicts and a cultural and demographic crisis (Flannery, 2005; Hughes, 2006). A chapter of this scenario that can certainly be omitted is the complete dying out of the population or abandonment of the territory (which happened, for example, on the Pitcairn Islands). Only the arrival of Europeans caused a real threat in this respect. The question as to whether the inhabitants were aware of what was happening in their natural environment is quite unwarranted. According to Anderson (2002), the colonisation of Remote Polynesia with its highly dispersed, small islands and fragile ecosystems in general would not have been possible without major anthropic changes in these ecosystems. Indeed, the colonists would not have been able to survive without such changes. CONCLUSIONS: CRISIS AND COLLAPSE The discussion presented above makes us pose one fundamental question: is it legitimate to accept the crisis and collapse hypothesis and acknowledge that the fall of Rapa Nui culture was caused by overexploitation of the environment along with adverse climatic conditions, or would another scenario be worth considering? Can we say without a doubt that the crisis took place before Europeans appeared on the Island? Contrary to the statements regularly appearing in the literature starting with the La Pérouse publication (McMichael, 2001; Flenley and Bahn, 2003; Diamond, 2005; Hunt and Lipo, 2009), there are many indications that there has never been – as frequently claimed – a “cultural devolution,” “ecocide,” “self-destruction” or “self-induced ecodisaster” on Rapa Nui. Free circulation of resources (tuff, red scoria, and obsidian) on the Island, specialised craftsmanship, and particularly the existence of groups of “traders” and “sculptors,” the highly complex system of moai production and transportation as well as permanent food exchange may indicate that 50 Prehistory of Rapa Nui (Easter Island): A General Outline Rapa Nui society knew the secret of peaceful co-operation and non-violent competition. The only group that seemed to separate itself off from the rest of the population were the inhabitants of Pōike, the eastern peninsula of Rapa Nui. According to the Island chronology, the period associated with moai construction is called the “Image ahu Period” (Ayres, 1979b; Fischer, 2005). It reached its climax in the 15th century. The increasing size of moai statues may be interpreted as the result of growing competition between the clans. There are well-known examples of unfinished sculptures whose size exceeds the completed ones by nearly twofold (Ayres, 1979b). A crisis eventually came at the turn of the 15th and 16th century. The Island’s economy declined along with the diminishing productivity of the ecosystem, the exchange relations between social groups were weakened and later collapsed entirely. During this period the Rapanuis could no longer afford to pay for the moai. Deterioration of the agricultural and fishing economy was most probably caused by the intensification of ENSO, one of the Little Ice Age peaks, drought and of course a mass crop failure (Fischer, 2005). At precisely this time connections between the islands also died out (Allen, 2006). We may suspect that the situation got even worse due to some as yet unidentified agricultural plagues, perhaps resulting from the Amerindian visits to the Island in the 15th century. Chickens, bred in carefully guarded stone coops (hare moa) (Hughes, 2006) became the Rapanuis’ staple food. The food crisis was undoubtedly related to the fact that access to local fish, wildfowl and their eggs was restricted by several taboos. For example, hunting and fishing was allowed only between July and September (Machowski, 1969). It should be remembered, however, that there are researchers (Fischer, 2005) who hold the opinion that all these tendencies are not to be seen as a final disaster, but rather as a process which began in the 15th century and lasted till at least the 18th century. This approach regards ecological circumstances as only a trigger, and not the main reason for population decline and eventually demographic collapse (Louwagie et al., 2006). Moreover, it is usually assumed that the processes which led to the decreasing availability of natural resources along with the population growth also brought a distinct social stratification (Hughes, 2006). Similar phenomena occurred throughout Polynesia. At the very beginning they were evolutionary in nature – chiefs (‘ariki or ariki-mau) and nobles (ali’i) 51 appeared. Later, after the crisis at the turn of the 15th and 16th century, the character of the elite probably changed and moai construction was replaced with a new cult and ritual, the Birdman cult (Tangata manu). The stone village of Orongo became the Island’s administrative and cultural centre. At this time many of the Make-make (God the Creator or Mother Earth) images were produced. This is also the time when inter-clan contacts most likely became harsher and more brutal (Hughes, 2006) and eventually developed into military conflict (17th century?) (Machowski, 1969). We should be aware, however, that these events may be seen and understood as regulators of population growth. Tim Flannery built his theory of the economy of predation, which he considers to be a typical form of economy in indigenous societies (Flannery, 1995), on the basis of events on Easter Island. It has been confirmed by various archaeological excavations and ecological studies, both on the Polynesian islands and in other parts of the world (Flannery, 1995; Hughes, 2006; Rallu, 2007). Small Pacific islands appear to provide a perfect model of those processes, to such an extent that today researchers talk about the “Easter Island Syndrome” and “Easter Island traps,” which refer to overexploitation of natural resources (Nagarajan, 2006). Colonists arriving in new lands immediately start to exploit the natural resources excessively, while at the same time they introduce new species of domesticated animals and plants into the local environment. Easy access to natural assets almost instantly brings a population explosion which results in an almost equally rapid deterioration of the biocenosis. The last stage in the process is the disintegration of the colonist population. Analysing socio-environmental relations on Easter Island, Brander and Tylor (1998) have come up with the “general equilibrium model of population and resource dynamics.” According to this model, anthropic pressure on the environment and dynamic population growth create cyclically interrelated spells of feast and famine and finally collapse (Brander and Tylor, 1998; Dalton and Coats, 2000). We must remember, however, that applying this particular model to the reality of 16th- and 17th-century Rapa Nui may be a controversial issue. The assumption that an environmental crisis occurred between the 13th and 14th century seems more legitimate. This ecological crisis did not influence the demographic and cultural development of Rapa Nui society – the only noticeable change affected the socio-cultural patterns of behaviour. 52 Prehistory of Rapa Nui (Easter Island): A General Outline The changes that took place in the 16th and 17th century might have been the culmination of a long-lasting process that developed on a climatic and environmental basis. Depending on approximations, this period is described either as a massive demographic crisis (the population shrank from 15–25 thousand to 2–6 thousand) or a continuation of stable development (2–4 thousand) within a marginal habitat and the “feast-and-famine” cycle (McMichael, 2001; Fischer, 2005; González-Pérez et al., 2006; Hunt, 2007). Neither of these scenarios assumes complete cultural and ecological breakdown. When Europeans came to Rapa Nui for the first time, some of the moai were still standing in their places, but after 1815 all of them were knocked down (Machowski, 1969). The incoherence in this regard which appears in many accounts results from two conditions – very short stopovers on the Island and quite long gaps between each visit. What is certainly worth noting is that 19th-century Easter Islanders were no longer able to build either boats or rafts – they used only small boat-rafts made of totora reed, but they were still experts in constructing moai (Machowski, 1969). Thus it is difficult to accept that some intense military conflicts brought about a change of the elite, rejection of religious traditions and destruction of moai before Contact. The demolition of the sculptures might have been a continuous process related to the fall of clans, families or chiefs, and not to general chaos on the Island (Anderson, 2002). It is worth noting that critical changes did not come until the 18th century (Hunt and Lipo, 2009). Precisely at this time, during the first contacts with Europeans, many Polynesian populations faced a severe crisis – increasing internal conflicts and wars which made them construct fortifications and refuges (Anderson, 2002; Rainbird, 2002). Anderson (2002) suggests, however, that this situation was brought about both by global and regional climatic changes (e.g. ENSO), not necessarily by anthropo-pressure. The latter was in fact necessary for the survival of local populations. Military conflicts which came later should instead be interpreted as a classic example of a population growth regulator. Population decline in Polynesia started or was significantly intensified only with the arrival of Europeans (González-Pérez et al., 2006). Interestingly, the first Europeans reported that the indigenous people were healthy, well-built and strong – locals were even able to crush nut shells with only their teeth (Machowski, 1969). Anthropological studies 53 seem to confirm those observations (Murrill, 1968). But with time, the physical condition of Rapanuis seemed to change. Roggeveen still claimed that Easter Island’s inhabitants were tall, fit and healthy, but members of a Spanish expedition in 1770 met only a few of them, and reported that they hid quickly “under the ground” and did not make a good impression (Machowski, 1969). Just four years later, in 1774, James Cook described the Rapanuis as ailing, short and only very few in number (or very few were to be seen) (Machowski, 1969; Hunt and Lipo, 2009). Successive expeditions confirmed this picture. Additionally, later travellers (e.g. La Pérouse) noticed that the area of farming land had decreased (Machowski, 1969). It seems that the decisive factor of Rapanui demographic breakdown was not so much the inter-clan conflicts, deforestation and productivity decline, but above all, Europeans visiting the Island and the diseases which they brought (mostly smallpox and syphilis) (Rainbird, 2002; Hunt, 2007; Rallu, 2007; Lipo et al., 2010). This hypothesis is supported by anthropological studies of approximately 500 skeletons dated to the time of Contact, which did not show any signs of battle injuries, but instead bore clear syphilitic deformations (Rainbird, 2002). Local oral tradition gives an even more detailed picture – people died so fast and in such enormous numbers that Rapanuis were not able to perform the traditional funerary rites but would leave bodies in the caves or simply throw them down the cliffs into the sea (Métraux, 1957). The 18th and 19th century brought an even faster rate of depopulation. Villages shrank and emptied, there were almost no Long-Ears left, just a handful of old men remained (Machowski, 1969). Between 1722 and 1862, Europeans paid as many as 53 visits to Easter Island which were potentially dangerous for the locals. We should also remember that the 19th century brought “slave raids” (Machowski, 1969; Rainbird, 2002). By 1877 there were only 111 inhabitants left on Easter Island (Machowski, 1969; González-Pérez et al., 2006). Europeans also brought some other environmental risks to the Island, namely rabbits, cows, horses, sheep, goats and pigs. Sheep turned out to be particularly dangerous. It is highly likely that they were responsible for the final disappearance of the palm trees from the Island (Hunt and Lipo, 2009). There is also more and more evidence that sheep were to blame for the massive erosion processes which have taken place within the last 100–200 years (Fischer, 2005; Stevenson et al., 2006). 54 Prehistory of Rapa Nui (Easter Island): A General Outline The discussion presented in this essay is based mostly on the latest field and laboratory studies, which are changing the ubiquitous and, for a long time, uncritically accepted model of “ecocide.” It seems that thinking in terms of Rapanui “ecological suicide” should be replaced with a new paradigm of disease-induced collapse, in which case we would have one more example of “ecological imperialism” (in the understanding of Crosby, 1993). REFERENCES Allen M.S. 2006. New Ideas about Late Holocene Climate Variability in the Central Pacific. Current Anthropology 47(3): 521–535. Alvarez R.V. 2010. Restoration on Rapa Nui. Ecological Restoration 28(4): 422–424. Anderson A. 2002. Faunal collapse, landscape change and settlement history in Remote Oceania. World Archaeology 33(3): 375–390. Anderson A. 2006. Polynesian seafaring and American horizons: a response to Jones and Klar. American Antiquity 71: 759–763. Anderson A., Sinoto Y. 2002. New Radiocarbon Ages of Colonisation Sites in East Polynesia. Asian Perspectives 41(2): 242–257. Anderson A., Chappell J., Gagan M., Grove R. 2006. Prehistoric maritime migration in the Pacific islands: a hypothesis of ENSO forcing. The Holocene 16: 1–6. Ayres W.S. 1979a. Easter Island Fishing. Asian Perspectives 22(1): 61–92. Ayres W.S. 1979b. Easter Island “Ahu” Archaeology Twenty-Five Years after the Norwegian Expedition: A Review of the Ahu a Kivi-Vai Teka Complex. Asian Perspectives 22(1): 93–99. Barber I. 2010. Diffusion or innovation? Explaining lithic agronomy on the southern Polynesian margins. World Archaeology 42(1): 74–89. Barnes S.S., Matisoo-Smith E., Hunt T.L. 2006. Ancient DNA of the Pacific rat (Rattus exulans) from Rapa Nui (Easter Island). Journal of Archaeological Science 33: 1536– 1540. Basener B., Ross D.S. 2005. Booming and Crashing Populations and Easter Island. SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics 65(2): 684–701. Brander J.A., Taylor M.S. 1998. The Simple Economics of Easter Island: A Ricardo-Malthus Model of Renewable Resource Use. The American Economic Review 88(1): 119–138. Campbell D.J., Atkinson I.A.E. 2002. Depression of tree recruitment by the Pacific rat (Rattus exulans Peale) on New Zealand’s northern offshore islands. Biological Conservation 107(1): 19–35. Cristino C., Vargas P. 2002. Archaeological Excavations and Reconstruction of Ahu Tongariki – Easter Island. Revista de Urbanismo 5, accessed on http://revistaurbanismo. uchile.cl/n5/cristino.html (28 Dec. 2011). 55 de la Croix D., Dottori D. 2008. Easter Island’s collapse: a tale of a population race. Journal of Economic Growth 13: 27–55. Cronin T.M. 1999. Principles of Paleoclimatology. New York: Columbia University Press. Crosby A.W. 1993. Ecological Imperialism: The Biological Expansion of Europe, 900–1900. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dalton T.R., Coats R.M. 2000. Could institutional reform have saved Easter Island? Journal of Evolutionary Economics 10: 489–505. Diamond, J. 2005. Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed. New York: Viking Books. Dransfield J., Flenley J.R., King S.M., Harkness D.D., Rapu S. 1984. A recently extinct palm from Easter Island. Nature 312(5996): 750–752. Dumont H.J., Cocquyt Ch., Fontugne M., Arnold M., Reyss J.-L., Bloemendal J., Oldfield F., Steenbergen C.L.M., Korthals H.J., Zeeb B.A. 1998. The end of moai quarrying on Lake Rano Raraku, Easer Island. Journal of Paleolimnology 20: 409–422. Fagan B. 2004. The Great Journey. The Peopling of Ancient America., Gainesville: University of Florida Press. Ferdon E.N. Jr. 1979. A Possible Source of Origin of the Easter Island Boat-Shape House. Asian Perspectives 22(1): 1–8. Finney B. 1977. Voyaging canoes and the settlement of Polynesia. Science 196: 1277–1285. Finney B. 2001. Voyage to Polynesia’s land’s end. Antiquity 75: 172–181. Fischer S.R. 1994. Rapanui’s Tu’u ko Iho versus Mangareva’s ‘Atu Motua: Evidence for Multiple Reanalysis and Replacement in Rapanui Settlement Traditions, Easter Island. The Journal of Pacific History 29(1): 3–18. Fischer S.R. 2005. Island at the End of the World. The Turbulent history of the Easter Island. London: Reaktion Books. Flannery T. 1995. The future eaters. An ecological history of the Australasian lands and people. New York: George Braziller. Flenley J.R. 1979. Stratigraphic Evidence of Environmental Change on Easter Island. Asian Perspectives 22(1): 33–40. Flenley J., Bahn P. 2003. The Enigmas of Easter Island. Oxford: Oxford University Press. de Gamboa P.S. 2007. The history of the Incas. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. Golson J. 1965. Thor Heyerdahl and the Prehistory of Easter Island. Oceania 36(1): 38–83. Gongora J., Rawlence N.J., Mobegi V.A., Jianlin H., Alcalde J.A., Matus J.T., Hanotte O., Moran Ch., Austin J.J., Ulm S., Anderson A.J., Larson G., Cooper A. 2008. Indo-European and Asian origins for Chilean and Pacific chickens revealed by mtDNA. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences 105(30): 10308–10313. González-Martin A., Garcia-Moro C., Hernández M., Moral P. 2006. Inbreeding and Surnames: A Projection Into Easter Island’s Past. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 129: 435–445. González-Pérez E., Esteban E., Via M., Garcia-Moro C., Hernández M., Moral P. 2006. Genetic Change in the Polynesian Population of Easter Island: Evidence from Alu Insertion Polymorphisms. Annals of Human Genetics 70: 829–840. 56 Prehistory of Rapa Nui (Easter Island): A General Outline Green R.C., Weisler M.I. 2002. The Mangarevan Sequence and Dating of the Geographic Expansion into Southeast Polynesia. Asian Perspectives 41(2): 213–241. Hagelberg E., Quevedo S., Turbon D., Clegg J.B. 1994. DNA from ancient Easter Islanders. Nature 369: 25–26. Hagelberg E., Kayser M., Nagy M., Roewer L., Zimdahl H., Krawczak M., Lió P., Schiefenhövel W. 1999. Molecular genetic evidence for the human settlement of the Pacific: analysis of mitochondrial DNA, Y chromosome and HLA markers. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society London B 354: 141–152. Heiser C.B. Jr. 1979. The gourd book. Norman and London: University of Oklahoma Press. Heyerdahl T. 1950. The Voyage of the Raft Kon-Tiki. The Geographical Journal 115(1/3): 20–41. Heyerdahl T. 1979. The Heterogeneity of Small Sculptures on Easter Island before 1886. Asian Perspectives 22(1): 9–31. Heyerdahl T. 1988. Aku-Aku: The Secret of Easter Island. Unwin Paperback. (First published 1958). Horrocks M., Wozniak J.A. 2008. Plant microfossil analysis reveals disturbed forest and a mixed-crop, dryland production system at Te Niu, Easter Island. Journal of Archaeological Science 35: 126–142. Hughes D. 2006. Nature and culture in the Pacific islands. Leidschrift 21(1): 129–143. Hunt T.L. 2007. Rethinking Easter Island’s ecological catastrophe. Journal of Archaeological Science 34: 485–502. Hunt T.L., Lipo C.P. 2006. Late Colonisation of Easter Island. Science 311: 1603–1606. Hunt T.L., Lipo C.P. 2008. Evidence for a Shorter Chronology on Rapa Nui (Easter Island). Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology 3: 140–148. Hunt T.L., Lipo C.P. 2009. Revisiting Rapa Nui (Easter Island) “Ecocide”. Pacific Science 63(4): 601–616. Irwin G. 1992. The prehistoric exploration and colonisation of the Pacific. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Irwin G., Bickler S.H., Quirke P. 1990. Voyaging by canoe and computer: experiments in the settlement of the Pacific. Antiquity 64: 34–50. Jones T.L., Klar K.A. 2005. Diffusion Reconsidered: Linguistic and Archaeological Evidence for Prehistoric Polynesian Contact with Southern California. American Antiquity 70: 457–484. Ladefoged T.N., Stevenson C.M., Haoa S., Mulrooney M., Puleston C., Vitousek P.M., Chadwick O.A. 2010. Soil nutrient analysis of Rapa Nui gardening. Archaeology of Oceania 45: 80–85. Langdon R. 1988. Manioc, a Long Concealed Key to the Enigma of Easter Island. The Geographical Journal 154(3): 324–336. Langdon R. 1995. New Light on Easter Island Prehistory in a “Censored” Spanish Report of 1770. The Journal of Pacific History 30(1): 112–120. Lie B.A., Dupuy B.M., Spurkland A., Fernández-Viña M.A., Hagelberg E., Thorsby E. 2006. Molecular genetic studies of natives on Easter Island: evidence of an early European and Amerindian contribution to the Polynesian gene pool. Journal compilation 69: 10–18. 57 Lipo C.P., Hunt T.L. 2009. AD 1680 and Rapa Nui Prehistory. Asian Perspectives 48(2): 309–317. Lipo C.P., Hunt T.L., Hundtoft B. 2010. Stylistic variability of stemmed obsidian tools (mata’a), frequency seriation, and the scale of social interaction on Rapa Nui (Easter Island). Journal of Archaeological Science 37(10): 2551–2561. Louwagie G., Stevenson C.M., Langohr R. 2006. The impact of moderate to marginal land suitability on prehistoric agricultural production and models of adaptive strategies for Easter Island (Rapa Nui, Chile). Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 25: 290–317. Lum J.K., Cann R.L. 2000. mtDNA Lineage Analyses: Origins and Migrations of Micronesians and Polynesians. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 113:151–168. Machowski J. 1969. Wyspa Wielkanocna. Warszawa: Wiedza Powszechna. Mann D., Edwards J., Chase J., Beck W., Reanier R., Mass M., Finney B., Loret J. 2008. Drought, vegetation change, and human history on Rapa Nui (Isla de Pascua, Easter Island). Quaternary Research 69: 16–28. Martinsson-Wallin H. 1998. Material culture and communication – an example of archaeological research on ceremonial sites in Polynesia. In: P. Wallin (ed.) Archaeology, communication and language. No Barriers Seminar Papers vol. I, 11–13. Oslo: The Kon-Tiki Museum. Martinsson-Wallin H., Crockford S.J. 2001. Early Settlement of Rapa Nui (Easter Island). Asian Perspectives 40(2): 244–278. Matisoo-Smith E., Robins J.H. 2004. Origins and Dispersals of Pacific Peoples: Evidence from mtDNA phylogenies of the Pacific rat. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences 101(24): 9167–9172. Matisoo-Smith E., Roberts R.M., Irwin G.J., Allen J.S., Penny D., Lambert D.M. 1998. Pattern of Prehistoric Human Mobility in Polynesia Indicated by mtDNA from the Pacific rat. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences 95(25): 15145–15150. McMichael T. 2001. Human frontiers, environments and disease. Past patterns, uncertain futures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mead M. 1976. New lives to old: the effects of new communication on old cultures in the Pacific. Papers of the East-West Communication Institute No.15. Honolulu, HI. Métraux A. 1957. Easter Island. A stone-age civilisation of the Pacific. New York: Oxford University Press. (http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=99353692; online access 18 Jan. 2011) Mieth A., Bork H.-R. 2005. History, origin and extent of soil erosion on Easter Island (Rapa Nui). Catena 63: 244–260. Mieth A., Bork H.-R. 2010. Humans, climate or introduced rats – which is to blame for the woodland destruction on prehistoric Rapa Nui (Easter Island)? Journal of Archaeological Science 37: 417–426. Murray-MacIntosh R.P., Scrimshaw B.J., Hatfield B.J., Penny D. 1998. Testing migration patterns and estimating founding population size in Polynesia by using human mtDNA sequences. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences 95: 9047–9052. Murrill R.I. 1968. Cranial and Postcranial Skeletal Remains from Easter Island. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. 58 Prehistory of Rapa Nui (Easter Island): A General Outline Nagarajan P. 2006. Collapse of Easter Island: Lessons for Sustainability of Small Islands. Journal of Developing Societies 22: 287–301. Palmer J.L. 1870. A Visit to Easter Island, or Rapa Nui, in 1868. Journal of the Royal Geographical Society of London 40: 167–181. Perry C.A., Hsu K.J. 2000. Geophysical, archaeological, and historical evidence support a solar-output model for climate change. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences 97(23): 12433–12438. Petchey F., Spriggs M., Leach F., Seed M., Sand C., Pietrusewsky M., Anderson K. 2011. Testing the human factor: radiocarbon dating the first peoples of the South Pacific. Journal of Archaeological Science 38(1): 29–44. Rainbird P. 2002. A Message for Our Future? The Rapa Nui (Easter Island) Ecodisaster and Pacific Island Environments. World Archaeology 33(3): 436–451. Rallu J.-L. 2007. Pre- and Post-Contact Population in Island Polynesia. In: P.V. Kirch, J.-L. Rallu (eds) The Growth and Collapse of Pacific Islands Societies. Archaeological and Demographic Perspectives, 15–34. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press. Rogers A.K. 2010. Accuracy of obsidian hydration dating based on obsidian-radiocarbon association and optical microscopy. Journal of Archaeological Science 37(12): 3239– 3246. Rolett B.V. 2002. Voyaging and Interaction in Ancient East Polynesia. Asian Perspectives 41(2): 182–194. Rull V., Cañellas-Boltà N., Sáez A., Giralt S., Pla S., Margalef O. 2010. Paleoecology of Easter Island: Evidence and uncertainties. Earth-Science Reviews 99: 50–60. Sáez A., Valero-Garcés B.L., Giralt S., Moreno A., Bao R., Pueyo J.J., Hernández A., Casas D. 2009. Glacial to Holocene climate changes in the SE Pacific. The Raraku Lake sedimentary record (Easter Island, 27°S). Quaternary Science Reviews 28: 2743– 2759. Schreiber K.J., Kintigh K.W. 1996. A Test of the Relationship between Site Size and Population. American Antiquity 61(3): 573–579. Sharp W.D., Kahn J.G., Polito C.M., Kirch P.V. 2010. Rapid evolution of ritual architecture in central Polynesia indicated by precise 230Th/U coral dating. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences 107(30): 13234–13239. Spriggs M., Anderson A. 1993. Late colonisation of East Polynesia. Antiquity 67: 200–217. Stefan V.H. 2004. Assessing Intrasample Variation: Analysis of Rapa Nui (Easter Island) Museum Cranial Collections Example. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 124: 45–58. Stevenson C.M., Haoa S. 1999. Diminishing agricultural productivity and the Collapse of ranked society on Easter Island. In: P. Wallin (ed.) Archaeology, agriculture and identity. No Barriers Seminar Papers vol. II, 4–12. Oslo: The Kon-Tiki Museum. Stevenson C.M., Jackson T.L., Mieth A., Bork H.-R., Ladefoged T.N. 2006. Prehistoric and early historic agriculture at Maunga Orito, Easter Island (RapaNui), Chile. Antiquity 80: 919–936. Stevenson C.M., Ladefoged T.N., Haoa S. 2007. An upland agricultural residence on Rapa Nui: Occupation of a hare oka (18–473G) in the Vaitea Region. Archaeology of Oceania 42: 72–78. 59 Storey A.A., Ramirez J.M., Quiroz D., Burley D.V., Addison D.J., Walter R., Anderson A.J., Hunt T.L., Athens J.S., Huynen L., Matisoo-Smith E.A. 2007. Radiocarbon and DNA evidence for a pre-Columbian introduction of Polynesian chickens to Chile. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences 104(25): 10335–10339. Thorsby E., Flåm S.T., Woldseth B., Dupuy B.M., Sanchez-Mazas A., Fernandez-Vina M.A. 2009. Further evidence of an Amerindian contribution to the Polynesian gene pool on Easter Island. Tissue Antigens 73: 582–585. Van Tilburg J.A., Keappler A.L., Weisler M., Cristino C., Spitzer A. 2008. Petrographic Analysis of thin-section of Samples from two Monolithic Statues (moai), Rapa Nui (Easter Island). Journal of the Polynesian Society 117(3): 297–300. Wallin P. 1999. The sweet potato in Pacific context – sweet and soft, but still a “hard fact”. In: P. Wallin (ed.) Archaeology, agriculture and identity. No Barriers Seminar Papers vol. II, 25–27. Oslo: The Kon-Tiki Museum. Weisler M.I. 1998. Hard Evidence for Prehistoric Interaction in Polynesia. Current Anthropology 39(4): 521–532. Wilmshurst J.M., Hunt T.L., Lipo C.P., Anderson A.J. 2010. High-precision radiocarbon dating shows recent and rapid initial human colonisation of East Polynesia. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences Early Edition, access on http://www.pnas.org/ content/early/2010/12/22/1015876108.full.pdf+html (28 Dec. 2011). 60