Tiffany
Davis
Dr.
Sonia Apgar Begert
English
102
25th
November, 2014
Easter Island
Easter Island, also known as Rapa
Nui, has long been a topic of study for geographers, archeologists, and
historians around the world. It is a small island located in the Southeastern
Pacific ocean, about 3,200 km West of Chile, and it is only about 64 square
miles (Foot, 12). Easter Island’s settlement is often discussed due to the
islands’ isolation and how difficult it would have been for early explorers to
reach the island. There are many different conversations and debates regarding
Easter Island, however, I will be focusing on the colonization and collapse of
the Island. One cannot study the collapse without first establishing the original
timeline and when/how the Islanders began. In the larger scale of things
studying the colonization and collapse of Easter Island is important because it
can be used as a small scale example of a society collapsing due to the
degradation of their environment.
Their environment may have been fragile,
but it was their actions and presence that destroyed it. With all of today’s’
growing environmental concerns we have a lot we can learn from places such as
Easter Island so that we do not repeat their mistakes and possibly have our own
society collapse in our near future. Easter Island collapsed before the
European’s arrival due to the deforestation and overall degradation of the
island’s environment which are attributed to overuse. That is exactly what is happening
to our environment now; we are cutting down trees, releasing toxins like carbon
dioxide into the air, and slowly but surely destroying and depleting our
natural resources.
The main arguments regarding Easter
Island concern the timeline of events. A few researchers such as Terry L. Hunt,
Carl P. Lipo, and Paul Rainbird (I have designated these sources group one)
argue that Easter Island was settled at a much later date than scientifically
shown previously. Jared Diamond, John Flenley, Kevin Butler, and Paul Bahn (I
have designated these sources group two) contest these theories. Group one’s
backgrounds are as follows: Terry Hunt is from the University of Hawai’i, Carl
Lipo is from California State University, and Paul Rainbird is from the
University of Whales. On the other hand, group two’s backgrounds are as
follows: Jared Diamond is from the
University of California and is a world renowned geographer, John Flenley is an
emeritus professor from Massey University, Kevin Butler is also from Massey University,
and Paul Bahn has a Ph.D. from the University of Cambridge. All of these
sources are very well educated, but only one group is correct.
It is important to know the accurate
timeline because it sets the baseline for when and how Easter Island collapsed.
There ought to be a focus on what primary factors contributed the most to
Easter Island’s collapse while simultaneously looking at which factors had a
much smaller impact. Group one, which consists of the key voices of my opposing
argument, believes that the European’s arrival on Easter Island in the 1700’s
was one of the main contributing factors to Easter Islands collapse. They also
believe that rats had more of a key role in the deforestation of the island. However,
group two which consists of my primary supporting voices, argues that the
island was already deforested by that time and that due to the environmental
damage, was already collapsing. There are a few side issues such as the
religion and how it pertains to the stone statues the islanders constructed,
various agricultural methods the islanders could have used, whether or not the
islanders had resource management institutions, and where the original settlers
migrated from, but these side arguments are tangential to my papers focus.
The settlement of Easter Island is
almost more heavily debated than the collapse of the Island’s society itself. Terry
L. Hunt and Carl P. Lipo have argued in their article, “Chronology, Deforestation,
and ‘Collapse’: Evidence vs. Faith in Rapa Nui Prehistory,” published in 2007, that
Easter Island conceptually could have been inhabited before AD 1200, but that
their evidence shows that they cannot prove it occurred sooner than that date (85).
Hunt and Lipo’s claim is based off of a series of 8 radiocarbon dates from
deposits at Anakena that are all very near the AD 1200 mark (Chronology, 85). What
Hunt and Lipo do not consider are the other radiocarbon-dated samples from
Anakena, and from other locations on the Island. On the other hand, John Flenley,
Kevin Butler, and Paul Bahn can prove that Easter Island was inhabited before
that time. In their article, “Respect Versus Contempt for Evidence: Reply to
Hunt and Lipo,” published in 2007, they first show that those radiocarbon dates
from Anakena cannot be more than a minimum date for their arrival because the
soil/clay had an obscure origin and the topsoil was eroded, but also that there
were earlier dates that Hunt and Lipo ignored (Flenley, 98). Flenley, Butler,
and Bahn continue on in their article listing numerous radiocarbon dates from
multiple locations that show the minimum date of settlement of Easter Island to
be AD 800 (101).
Additionally, Helene
Martinsson-Wallin and Susan J. Crockford provide evidence in their article,
“Early Settlement of Rapa Nui (Easter Island),” published in 2001, that Easter
Island was inhabited by AD 400 (5). However, they admit that this settlement
date is based off of only three radiocarbon dates of burned charcoal, which
with only a 66% chance of accuracy of any one date being correct, is not enough
data to conclude that they arrived before or near AD 400 (Martinsson-Wallin).
Nevertheless, they can show that there are enough radiocarbon dates of burned
charcoal, sediment layers, rat bones, and bird bones that fall near and before AD
800 (Martinsson-Wallin, 5-7). I therefore
conclude that the settlement date of Easter Island was approximately AD 800. To
say they settled the island prior to that would be misleading for there is not
enough information to prove that they did, and to say they settled after that
would be ignoring the evidence.
In the beginning when Easter Island
was first settled it is approximated that there were 30 people that arrived
together on the island (Pakandam, 8). In Jared Diamond’s book Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or
Survive, published in 2006, Diamond approximates Easter Island’s total
population. Diamond states that because they had 1,233 houses, with
approximately 5-15 people in them, they can safely say that at least a third of
the houses were inhabited at one point in time, and thus the maximum population
of Easter Island could have been anywhere between 6,000-30,000 at its peak (Collapse, 90). Terry Hunt and Carl Lipo
give a much lower estimate of the population of Easter Island at its peak of
about 4,000 people (Conflicting, 13).
John Flenley and Paul Bahn hypothesize that Hunt and Lipo’s reasoning for not
accepting that Easter Island had a lower population peak, is due to Hunt and
Lipo’s belief that Easter Island was not colonized until a later date (Conflicting, 13). However, as we
established above, Easter Island was colonized at the minimum date of AD 800,
not after AD 1200 as Hunt and Lipo claim.
Another common topic of debate
between group one and group two, is what level of involvement the rats had with
the deforestation of the island. Group two states that the rats had minimal
involvement, and that it was the islanders’ impact on their fragile environment
that led to deforestation. Contrarily, Terry Hunt and Carl Lipo argue that rats
were one of the main causes of the islands’ deforestation (93). However, I will
show they were not. Hunt is quoted saying, “I believe that there is substantial
evidence that it was rats, more so than humans, that led to the deforestation,”
(Flenley, Bahn, 12). In their article, “Revisiting Rapa Nui (Easter Island)
‘Ecocide’ 1,” Hunt and Lipo even goes so far as to argue that because rats had
devastating effects on the forests in Hawai’i, that we should believe that this
may have happened on Easter Island as well (5). Though Hawai’i is in a similar
area to Easter Island, it is an entirely different island with a different
ecosystem. Thus, the issue they had with rats cannot be applied because it
happened in Hawai’i, a completely different place. It is common knowledge that
the rats did eat the seeds of the palm trees that were the primary type of tree
on East Island. Yet, the rats did not eat the actual trees, they did not cut
them down, nor did they even eat every species of tree on that Island. The fact
is, rats did not clear the Island of the palm tree, the inhabitants of Easter
Island did. Someone had to cut down that last tree. Though rats did have an
impact on the trees ability to replenish, they did not destroy the forest that
covered the island when the islanders arrived, and thus were not a primary
factor in the islands deforestation (Flenley, Bahn, 12). Having established
that the rats did not cause deforestation, they then also did not contribute
substantially to the collapse of Easter Island either.
Disease is another issue that has
been considered to be a different primary cause of the Island’s collapse. Though
diseases (such as smallpox), did not arrive until the Europeans arrived. Paul
Rainbird is quoted saying, “The population collapse at Easter Island had less
to do with deforestation in comparison with changes in culture influenced by
contact with Europeans, including the introduction of new diseases,” (Koss,
548). Hunt and Lipo also believe disease had a bigger impact on Easter Island
than deforestation did. Lorelei Koss, from Dickinson College, uses differential
equations in her article “Sustainability in a Differential Equations Course: A
Case Study of Easter Island,” to show that disease could have had an impact on the collapse of Easter Island (548).
Yet, by the time the Europeans arrived and introduced smallpox to Easter
Island’s population, Easter Island was already deforested and suffering from
the effects of that on their environment. This leads us to the timeline of
deforestation to show how diseases and the European’s arrival were not the
cause of Easter Island’s collapse. Without trees the islanders’ population was
already collapsing due to their inability to continue farming efficiently.
Before getting into the food
shortages, we must establish a timeline of when the Island was deforested. J.D.
Hughes, an emeritus professor from the University of Denver Colorado, shows in
his article, “Easter Island: Model for Environmental History?” that there is
“... Incontrovertible evidence that the island had been covered by forest for
millennia before the first human inhabitants arrived.”(1). This shows us that
without human interference Easter Island likely would never have been
deforested. Radiocarbon-dated material that establishes when Easter Island was
colonized shows that shortly after colonization the islanders began cutting
down trees to build their homes and fuel their fires.
They began building huge statues called
Moai around AD 1000, because we cannot radiocarbon-date the stone, this date
was determined by radiocarbon-dating the charcoal found in the stone bases of
these statues (Diamond, Collapse, 97).
In order to move these megalithic statues and their bases the Islanders chopped
down trees to roll the statues to their designated areas (Hamilton, 172). This
practice resulted in a noticeable loss of the islands forest. Approximately 900
statues have been inventoried, most of which were moved significant distances
by rolling them on trees, and 300 of which were giant (Diamond, Revisited, 1693). This information
implies a lot of trees must have been used to transport these statues. Another
practice the islanders developed around AD 1280, was chopping down the palms
and burning the debris as shown by radiocarbon-dated charcoal, burned remnants,
and burned stumps (Diamond, Revisited, 1692). This resulted in an additional
loss of the palm canopy that once covered the Island. This is also the time
when Easter Island’s population peaked (around AD 1650) and then the population
suddenly collapsed (Foot, 13). It takes time for effects of environmental
changes to be noticeable. This shows us that the forest collapsed slightly
before the population began to crash, and that the population began to crash
about 100 years before the Europeans even arrived.
Going further with the
radiocarbon-dated charcoal, Jared Diamond states in his article, “Easter Island
Revisited,” that, “By identifying 78,000 bits of burned wood from radiocarbon-dated
ovens and middens [archeologists] recognized more than 20 other tree and woody
plant species exterminated during human settlement,” (1692). With the
radiocarbon dates this information shows us that the palm tree that primarily,
and originally, forested the island was mostly gone by AD 1450, and other large
trees were mostly gone by AD 1650 (Diamond, Revisited, 1692). It also provides
insight into how the island was deforested. The inhabitants burned copious
amounts of trees while they were living on the island. Other radiocarbon-dated
material shows that during the time while the trees were becoming more and more
scarce between AD 1450 and AD 1650, the islanders had to make the switch to
burning grasses and sedges instead of wood for fuel (Diamond, Revisited, 1692).
Though they were adapting, they still suffered numerous consequences from the
deforestation of their Island. Though the rats did not contribute to the actual
deforestation they did make it more difficult for trees to replenish. On the
other hand, given the amount of time it takes to grow a tree, it likely
wouldn’t have made that much of a difference in the short term while the
society was already beginning to collapse.
One of these consequences was food
scarcity. They did try adapting to their deforested land by changing their
agricultural methods in order to utilize stone to protect the soil from the
elements, a job trees once did (Diamond, Revisited, 1692). The loss of trees
resulted in the loss of the tree canopy that once protected their soils.
Without that protection the soil was vulnerable to the wind, rain, erosion, and
could not hold moisture as well as it used to. The use of lithic mulch to aid
the soil in holding water, prevent evaporation of that water, and prevent
erosion (Stevenson, 921) was a smart move on their part, but they could only do
so much. Their crop yield could never be what it was when they had the natural
protection of the trees to aid them. The sap from the trees was another food
staple they lost when the island was deforested (Foot, 15). Birds once
supplemented the islander’s food supply but with no trees as safe havens they
went extinct shortly after deforestation (Foot, 15). This left the islanders
with one less source of protein. Without wood the inhabitants of Easter Island
could not build boats to leave the island and thus find more food either, further
complicating their situation and leaving them with no exit.
Furthermore, the food scarcity led
to civil war. The presence of severely damaged bones and verbal history from
descendants of such warfare during AD 1650-1680 suggest a society in serious
turmoil collapsing into civil war due to their lack of resources (Flenley,
Butler, 101). Additionally there was an abundance of spear heads that were
radiocarbon-dated in this same time period, prior to European arrival (Flenley,
Butler, 101). The spearheads imply that the conflict was severe enough that it
warranted the manufacturing weapons. This is when Easter Island collapsed.
Without the trees that once covered the island they lost a lot of their
resources for food. While their population was at its peak, they soon fell into
a civil war spurred by lack of resources, and their society inevitably collapsed.
When the Europeans arrived in the
late 1700’s they found a society that had already failed. First and foremost,
their records indicate that they found only 1,400-1,600 people inhabiting the
island when they first arrived (Diamond, Collapse,
109). When you compare this to the earlier estimated peak population
numbers of 6,000-30,000 you can see there was a huge loss in the number of
people. The Europeans additionally described the people as lean, tired, and
worn (Diamond, Collapse, 109), which
further indicates starvation due to their environmental challenges that
resulted from deforestation as the reason for their collapse. Most accounts of
the European’s arrival state that the island had no trees upon it when they
arrived, but some state there were a few sporadically placed (Hughes, 4). Even
if there were a few trees, there were not enough resources to support the
inhabitants of the island.
Individually these instances are
only suggestive that Easter Island collapsed, however, together they provide a
massive wall of evidence showing that Easter Island collapsed before the
Europeans arrival in the late 1700’s (Flenley, Butler, 102). Going back, we can
see that rats only reduced the trees ability to replenish but they were not the
underlying cause of deforestation. Due to the fact that this information shows
that Easter Island’s collapse occurred prior to the European’s arrival, there
is no way disease could have been responsible for the collapse of Easter Island
as Hunt and Lipo argue. With no trees the Islanders could not leave the Island,
they could not continue building, and they could not continue moving their
monolithic statues; they were burning grasses to stay warm and they were having
issues with their agricultural sustainability. Easter Island is a small scale
demonstration of what could happen to our society if we do not make changes.
Like the Easter Islanders, we cannot
leave our environment; we cannot leave Earth once we deplete its resources. Our
world is a fragile environment, and if we continue cutting down the trees and polluting
our atmosphere we will end up like the Easter Islanders. Easter Island may not
have made a big impact on our society today, however, its lessons should. We
need to learn from these lessons of sustainability and protect the natural
resources we have before we end up in a dire situation as they did. Easter
Island collapsed due to deforestation; will we let that be our fate as well?
Works Cited
Diamond, Jared M. Collapse:
How Societies Choose to Fail or Survive. London: Penguin Books. 2006. Print.
----. “Easter Island Revisited.” Science, New Series 317 (2006):
1692-1694. American
Association for the Advancement of Science. JSTOR. Web. 16
Oct. 2014.
Flenley, John, Kevin Butler, and Paul Bahn. “Respect Versus
Contempt for Evidence: Reply to Hunt and Lipo.” Rapa Nui Journal 21.2 (2007): 98-104. Web. 23 Oct.
2014.
Flenley, John, Paul Bahn. “Conflicting Views of Easter
Island.” Rapa Nui Journal 21.1
(2007):
11-13. Web. 23 Oct. 2014.
Foot, K. David. “Easter Island; A Case Study in
Non-sustainability.” Greener Management International 48
(2006): 11-20. Academic Search Premier. Web. 14 Oct 2014.
Hamilton, Sue, Mike Seager Thomas, and Ruth Whitehouse.
"Say It with Stone: Constructing with Stones on Easter Island." World
Archaeology 43.2 (2011): 167-190. Academic
Search Premier. Web. 21 Oct. 2014.
Hughes, J.D. “Easter Island: Model for Environmental
History?” Capitalism, Nature,
Socialism 14.2 (2003):
77. Proquest Research Library. Web. 7 Oct 2014.
Hunt, Terry L. “Rethinking the Fall of Easter Island.” The American Scientist. (2014).
Web. 2 Oct. 2014.
Hunt, Terry L., and Carl P. Lipo. “Revisiting Rapa Nui
(Easter Island); ‘Ecocide’ 1.” Pacific
Science 63.4 (2009):
601-16. Proquest Research Library. Web. 7 Oct. 2014.
----. “Chronology, Deforestation, and ‘Collapse:’ Evidence
vs. Faith in Rapa Nui Prehistory.” Rapa
Nui Journal 21.2 (2007):
85-97. Academia. Web. 23 Oct. 2014.
Koss, Lorelei. "Sustainability in a Differential
Equations Course: A Case Study of Easter Island." International
Journal of Mathematical Education in Science & Technology 42.4
(2011): 545-553. Computer Source. Web. 16 Oct. 2014.
Martinsson-Wallin, Helene, and Susan J. Crockford. “Early
Settlement of Rapa Nui (Easter Island).” Asian
Perspectives 40.2 (2001):
244-78. Proquest Research Library. Web. 7 Oct. 2014.
Pakandam, Barzin. “Why Easter Island Collapsed: An Answer
for an Enduring Question.” Economic
History working Papers, 117/09. Department of Economic History, London
School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK. (2009). Web. 2 Oct. 2014.
Rainbird, Paul. "A Message for Our Future? The Rapa Nui
(Easter Island) Ecodisaster and Pacific Island Environments." World
Archaeology 33.3 (2002): 436-451. Academic Search Premier. Web.
14 Oct 2014.
Stevenson, Christopher M., et al. "Prehistoric and
Early Historic Agriculture at Maunga Orito, Easter Island (Rapa Nui),
Chile." Antiquity 80.310 (2006): 919-936. Academic
Search Premier. Web. 21 Oct. 2014.
No comments:
Post a Comment