Archaeology Magazine - March/April 1987 - 31

Stylistic analysis also reveals the
evolution of statue form. The famous
kneeling statue of Rano Raraku known
as TUturi is one of two such figures
documented. lUturi is postulated to be
a late stylistic development, antecedents of which are clearly seen in
other smaller sculpture on ahu sites.
This suggestion is in direct contrast
to earlier speculation which placed
this so-called "aberrant" figure in an
early time frame.
Based on the cumulative evidence, Hituri was probably carved late
in the Ahu Moai Phase (a.D. 10001500) and has clear design antecedents
in the larger corpus of sculpture.
It may have had a specialized symbolic
function, and may have emerged either
as a response to some cultural trauma
or re-alignment of socio-political
structure which occurred late in the
use of ahu. The statue may also have
appeared in response to some special
ritual sub-set of activity during the
same time frame.
Another frequent misunderstanding is that two extraordinarily complex religious cults- the statue cult
and the post A.D. 1500 birdman cult
(Below) This statue found on
the transport road between the
quarry and the south coast illustrates carved hands and
hami, a component of the dorsal design representing the
sacred loincloth of mate authority. (Right) The hands of
the statues were elaborately
executed, and on the largest
ones take on distinct wing-like
qualities . These hands have
double-incised lines separating
the fingers, an added investment of time and energy documented at only a few sites .

which replaced it- developed independently and were completely distinct
from one another. In other words, the
statue cult was rejected, statues were
toppled, and the birdman cult arose
full-blown from the wreckage.
Iconographie analysis of the statues suggests that bird symbology was
a real, important and evolving part
of statue design. In particular, a basrelief-carved dorsal design appears
on the backs of some excavated images in the quarry, on some statues
once placed on ahu, and on several
statues "in transport" to ahu. This
dorsal design, in seven documented
variations, was present on statues of
more than one type of material and
more than one form type. The components of the design include the abstracted form of the human face
illustrated by the vertical line which
indicates the spine of the statue and
two curved lines at each shoulder.
This depiction of the human face
appears as well on carved wooden ceremonial paddles, and is very significant in Polynesian iconography and
genealogy.
Superimposed on this spine/face

design is an abstracted or conventionalized representation of the sacred
loincloth of chiefly authority (maro).
The bas-relief single or double circles
which surmount the curved lines of the
maro find their closest counterparts
in the circles which represent eyes
on bas-relief birdman petroglyphs at
the sacred site of Orongo. Here, Georgia Lee of UCLA has suggested the
stylistic development of birdman petroglyphs in situ from incised line figures to bas-relief carvings. Eye
symbolism in dorsal design is supported by the importance of the eye in
Easter Island art and ideology. Statues on one site have been shown by
Sergio Rapu to have held red scoria
and coral eyes in their carved sockets. Our documentation confirms the
fact that only statues once erect
on ahu had one or two types of carved
eye sockets, both of which could have
held inlay.

.^^.nother frequent misconception
about Easter Island is that, with the
toppling of the ahu statues, the ideology which they represented was simultaneously and summarily rejected.
There are two notions implicit in this
assumption which are not supported
by the evidence. It is not clear, for
example, that all statues were only
toppled as a consequence of either
warfare or competition. It is possible
that some statues were ritually
destroyed before new ones were placed
on sites. Secondly, there is evidence
to suggest that aspects of the statue
cult ideology survived the period of
carving and erecting monolithic
statues.
All available evidence indicates
that one of the constant and recurring themes of Easter Island archaeology is the reuse over time of
ceremonial sites. Such reuse reached
from the Settlement Phase (a.D.
400-1000) straight through the Pro tohistoric Phase (1722-1868). Evidence
of the importance of the beliefs and
practices which the statues represented can be seen in the various
documented ways the statues and ahu
were reutilized.
Statues and statue fragments
(particularly statue heads) were incorporated into ceremonial architecture
from one building phase to another
in a probable belief that the statue's
mana would also thus be transferred.
1987
March/April

Archaeology Magazine - March/April 1987

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Archaeology Magazine - March/April 1987