'A PO INLAND STATUE PROJECT: THE RAPA NUl YOUTH INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM 2008 REPORT Britton Shepardson, Mareva Cruz, Cristina Osorio, Veronica Vergara, Francisco Torres, Vai Torres, Javiera Tuki, Marta Vigouroux, & Tiare Zuniga Rapa Nui I TRaDUCTION other hand, are far fewer. However, reconnaissance suggests that numerous inland ceremonial sites, including statues, do ince 2003, 'A P6 - The Rapa Nui Youth exist. Furthermore, spatial analysis of the most recent Involvement Program has provided high school intensive survey of inland statue locations on the island has Sstudents from the Rapa Nui community with the revealed a striking, and previously undocumented, correlation opportunity to participate directly in conservation and research between the spatial distribution ofdozens of moai (Shepardson projects on their own island. The program includes classroom, 2005a, 2005b, 2006) and historic territorial divisions laboratory, and fieldwork components, and students are (Routledge 1919) recorded early in the 20th century. encouraged to take part in all aspects ofprojects - from The Inland Statue Project includes intensive survey and design to execution to publication. documentation ofarchaeological sites - both secular and The goals ofthe 'A P6 program are to enhance awareness ceremonial- along Routledge's documented territorial ofcultural and natural resources, to further general education boundaries. The risks that these inland archaeological sites on the island, and to develop expertise in archaeology and face are quite different from the impacts ofconcentrated related sciences. Projects within the'A P6 program are tourism that threaten historic cultural resources along the designed specifically to be non-destructive (omitting excava­ coast. Over the course of the last century, tens ofthousands of tion for the sake ofsustainability). And in order to diversify ungulate livestock and various invasive plant species have student interests and experiences, projects include either a caused extensive irreparable damage to archaeological sites broad spatial scale or a broad application ofvarious scientific (Porteous 1981). In addition, of the nearly 7,000 hectares fields. (17,300 acres) of the island once set aside as Chilean national Original field research by 'A P6 students has included parkland in the 1960s, thousands ofhectares have already been projects dedicated to two- and three-dimensional mapping of converted to private and often poorly-monitored properties the Puna Pau pukao (topknot) quarry as well as photogram­ (Ramirez 2001). Repatriation of parkland to islanders - in metric and lichenometric investigations at Ahu Vinapu theory a blessing to cultural conservation - in reality often (Rutherford, et al. 2008; Shepardson, et al. 2004; Shepardson, leads to bulldozing, plowing, and agricultural development. et al. 2006; Shepardson & Torres 2009; Torres & Shepardson And despite the evident destruction that livestock, invasive 2005). plants, agriculture, repatriation, and tourism have caused to In 2008, students of 'A P6 began the program's most archaeological remains, these elements continue to pose ambitious project to date - The Inland Statue Project. Over serious threats to historic sites at an accelerated rate. Within the course of the next three to five years, students will execute years, many more archaeological sites (especially the "low­ an island-wide archaeological survey intended to test the profile" undocumented inland sites) may be at risk. relationship between statues located in the interior regions of In past research, more than ninety moai located through­ the island and the historic territorial boundaries documented out inland regions of the island were classified as abandoned by British ethnologist Katherine Routledge nearly a century "in transport" (e.g., Gonzalez, et al. 1988). This indiscrim­ ago (Figure I). inate, and in some circumstances completely unjustifiable (see Routledge 1919; Shepardson 2007), interpretation ofso many PROJECT OVERVIEW statues being simultaneously abandoned amidst social up­ heaval and environmental degradation looms large in sensa­ Research and conservation efforts, both responsible for tionalized accounts ofthe island's chaotic collapse. and reflective of tourists' interests, have focused overwhelm­ The current 'A P6 project assesses the distinct possibility, ingly on megalithic statuary at the Rano Raraku quarry and seemingly overlooked by archaeologists in the past, that many ceremonial sites along the island's perimeter. Only relatively inland statues were not abandoned in transport amidst social / recently have archaeologists made a concerted effort to ecological catastrophe but rather were situated precisely as formally document and analyze inland / upland areas ofRapa boundary or site markers in a historical socio-political organi­ Nui (e.g., Bork, et al. 2004; Ladefoged, et al. 2005; Stevenson, zation. et al. 2002; Stevenson, et al. 2007; Wozniak 2001). The bulk The Inland Statue Project may help to challenge pre­ of these inland studies attempt to identify and describe pre­ vailing interpretations of the spatial distribution of inland historic settlements and agricultural complexes. Systematic statuary and, more generally for research and conservation documentation and analysis ofinland ceremonial sites, on the purposes, our valuation ofinland archaeological sites. Finally, Rapa NUl Journal· Vol. 23, NO.1· May 2009 N -+- LaPorousaBy HITIUlRA(UR&Oll.li.J) TUPAlJOTU ~~.OR()ORONGO .wli< .. ~ RAMO RARAI<U !~ i:t:' 1 ron a..-i.lri M A EASTER ISLAND POLITICAL Scale of Mi}.,. 1 0 1 3 L..---1! I Nole.-·The dividing lines shown are not defined boundaries. Figure 1. Map of territorial divisions published by Routledge (1919) with inset of 'A P6 2008 survey area. 2 2 the project may serve as a novel vein of empirical research, m (335,000 yds. ), our team recorded qualitative information, recently called for by a number ofscientists (e.g., Hunt & Lipo quantitative information, and took digital photographs for all 200I; Mulrooney, et al. in prep - A; Rainbird 2002; archaeological remains encountered. To make our survey truly Shepardson 2006; Young 2006), to critically re-evaluate the detailed and comprehensive, and to make our data useful for validity ofthe increasingly popular "collapse" hypothesis for both archaeological and conservation purposes, our team Rapa Nui prehistory. compiled all of this infonnation in a digital geographic infor­ mation system (GIS). Furthermore, for all stmctural remains FIELDWORK encountered, students created even smaller-scale detailed maps that were then digitally scanned, traced, and geo-rectified to fit Our project goal is to survey the lines that Routledge our larger GIS. The end result is a map which allows users to believed to be territorial boundaries between familial clans seamlessly investigate at any scale, from island-wide to across the island. Our current survey covers a 200 ill (219 yd.) individual stone details (Figure 2). All data is freely available swath along a geo-rectified version of Routledge's boundaries on the 'A P6 website, www.terevaka.net. (Shepardson 2005a) in an attempt to determine whether or not With our 2008 survey area, the 'A P6 team documented repetitive patterns ofstatue and settlement locations exist 197 archaeological sites (Figures 2 & 3). Our survey com­ across the island's interior. memorates the 40th anniversary ofPatrick McCoy's survey of Our locational data were collected with a Trimble Recon the same region of the island. McCoy's 1968 survey, however, handheld unit and backpack antenna that were donated to the recorded only eight archaeological sites in the same 1.4 km by Museo Antropol6gico Padre Sebastian Englert and 'A P6 by 200 m (0.87 by 219 yd.) swath ofland (McCoy 1976). Some the Chilean winery Villa Santa Rita. In almost all cases of the discrepancy between the number ofsites between these (>95%), our data locations have a radius of error of less than 1 two surveys likely has to do with the intensity of the surveys. meter (1 yd.). Students of'A P6 recorded even solitary para (water-worn Between the months of September and November of beach cobbles) and paenga (quarried basalt), whereas McCoy 2008, 'A P6 students surveyed an area approximately 1.4 km recorded mostly larger or more complex remains. by 200 m (0.87 mi. by 219 yd.) between Ahu Vinapu and the Another reason for the large discrepancy between the Te Manavai crater (see Figure 2). Surveying roughly 280,000 number ofsites in the area is that McCoy included multiple Rapa Nui Journal • Vol. 23, NO.1· May 2009 " "- x moai (statue) o site (McCoy 1976) Te "- Manavai • site ('a p6 2008) 02-228 Q 181 • .; • • 0 • • • • ft.,.. Vinapu • • fl. ~ •• • • • .• ~ ~ .#.".. , 02-210 •• • . .,. •• ••• • .'.'i ... ~ • •• <J • ~, ••­ I, • x~ x 02-209 __c====-_-====-__ Meters o 500 Figure 2. 2008 survey grid centered along a territorial boundary. Inset shows an example of detailed structural maps drawn by 'A P6 students. features or architectural units within each "site". We chose to ANALYSIS refine our scale ofdata collection to smaller units. Our point is not to suggest that McCoy's work was inaccurate or insuf­ Our long-term objective is to test what we consider to be ficient but rather to demonstrate the remaining potential in our null hypothesis, that inland statues were abandoned Easter Island archaeology to learn from non-destructive survey simultaneously and haphazardly amidst island-wide work and surface archaeology. McCoy (1976: 155) very catastrophe.