In just a few centuries, the people of Easter Island wiped out their forest,
drove their plants and animals to extinction, and saw their complex society spiral into chaos and cannibalism. Are we about
to follow their lead?
Among the most riveting mysteries of human
history are those posed by vanished civilizations. Everyone who has seen the abandoned buildings of the Khmer, the Maya, or
the Anasazi is immediately moved to ask the same question: Why did the societies that erected those structures disappear?
Their vanishing touches us as the disappearance
of other animals, even the dinosaurs, never can. No matter how exotic those lost civilizations seem, their framers were humans
like us. Who is to say we won't succumb to the same fate? Perhaps someday New York's
skyscrapers will stand derelict and overgrown with vegetation, like the temples at Angkor Wat and Tikal.
Among all such vanished civilizations, that
of the former Polynesian society on Easter Island remains unsurpassed in mystery and isolation. The
mystery stems especially from the island's gigantic stone statues and its impoverished landscape, but it is enhanced by our
associations with the specific people involved: Polynesians represent for us the ultimate in exotic romance, the background
for many a child's, and an adult's, vision of paradise. My own interest in Easter was kindled over 30 years ago when I read
Thor Heyerdahl's fabulous accounts of his Kon-Tiki voyage.
But my interest has been revived recently by
a much more exciting account, one not of heroic voyages but of painstaking research and analysis. My friend David Steadman,
a paleontologist, has been working with a number of other researchers who are carrying out the first systematic excavations
on Easter intended to identify the animals and plants that once lived there. Their work is contributing to a new interpretation
of the island's history that makes it a tale not only of wonder but of warning as well.
with an area of only 64 square miles, is the world's most isolated scrap of habitable land. It lies in the Pacific
Ocean more than 2,000 miles west of the nearest continent (South America), 1,400 miles
from even the nearest habitable island (Pitcairn). Its subtropical location and latitude-at 27 degrees south, it is approximately
as far below the equator as Houston is north of it-help give it a rather mild
climate, while its volcanic origins make its soil fertile. In theory, this combination of blessings should have made Easter
a miniature paradise, remote from problems that beset the rest of the world.
The island derives its name from its "discovery"
by the Dutch explorer Jacob Roggeveen, on Easter (April 5) in 1722. Roggeveen's first impression was not of a paradise but
of a wasteland: "We originally, from a further distance, have considered the said Easter Island as sandy; the reason for that
is this, that we counted as sand the withered grass, hay, or other scorched and burnt vegetation, because its wasted appearance
could give no other impression than of a singular poverty and barrenness."
The island Roggeveen saw was a grassland without
a single tree or bush over ten feet high. Modern botanists have identified only 47 species of higher plants native to Easter,
most of them grasses, sedges, and ferns. The list includes just two species of small trees and two of woody shrubs. With such
flora, the islanders Roggeveen encountered had no source of real firewood to warm themselves during Easter's cool, wet, windy
winters. Their native animals included nothing larger than insects, not even a single species of native bat, land bird, land
snail, or lizard. For domestic animals, they had only chickens. European visitors throughout the eighteenth and early nineteenth
centuries estimated Easter's human population at about 2,000, a modest number considering the island's fertility. As Captain
James Cook recognized during his brief visit in 1774, the islanders were Polynesians (a Tahitian man accompanying Cook was
able to converse with them). Yet despite the Polynesians' well-deserved fame as a great seafaring people, the Easter Islanders
who came out to Roggeveen's and Cook's ships did so by swimming or paddling canoes that Roggeveen described as "bad and frail."
Their craft, he wrote, were "put together with manifold small planks and light inner timbers, which they cleverly stitched
together with very fine twisted threads. . . . But as they lack the knowledge and particularly the materials for caulking
and making tight the great number of seams of the canoes, these are accordingly very leaky, for which reason they are compelled
to spend half the time in bailing." The canoes, only ten feet long, held at most two people, and only three or four canoes
were observed on the entire island.
With such flimsy craft, Polynesians could never
have colonized Easter from even the nearest island, nor could they have traveled far offshore to fish. The islanders Roggeveen
met were totally isolated, unaware that other people existed. Investigators in all the years since his visit have discovered
no trace of the islanders' having any outside contacts: not a single Easter Island rock or product has turned up elsewhere,
nor has anything been found on the island that could have been brought by anyone other than the original settlers or the Europeans.
Yet the people living on Easter claimed memories of visiting the uninhabited Sala y Gomez reef 260 miles away, far beyond
the range of the leaky canoes seen by Roggeveen. How did the islanders' ancestors reach that reef from Easter, or reach Easter
from anywhere else?
most famous feature is its huge stone statues, more than 200 of which once stood on massive stone platforms lining the coast.
At least 700 more, in all stages of completion, were abandoned in quarries or on ancient roads between the quarries and the
coast, as if the carvers and moving crews had thrown down their tools and walked off the job. Most of the erected statues
were carved in a single quarry and then somehow transported as far as six miles-despite heights as great as 33 feet and weights
up to 82 tons. The abandoned statues, meanwhile, were as much as 65 feet tall and weighed up to 270 tons. The stone platforms
were equally gigantic: up to 500 feet long and 10 feet high, with facing slabs weighing up to 10 tons.
Roggeveen himself quickly recognized the problem
the statues posed: "The stone images at first caused us to be struck with astonishment," he wrote, "because we could not comprehend
how it was possible that these people, who are devoid of heavy thick timber for making any machines, as well as strong ropes,
nevertheless had been able to erect such images." Roggeveen might have added that the islanders had no wheels, no draft animals,
and no source of power except their own muscles. How did they transport the giant statues for miles, even before erecting
them? To deepen the mystery, the statues were still standing in 1770, but by 1864 all of them had been pulled down, by the
islanders themselves. Why then did they carve them in the first place? And why did they stop?
The statues imply a society very different
from the one Roggeveen saw in 1722. Their sheer number and size suggest a population much larger than 2,000 people. What became
of everyone? Furthermore, that society must have been highly organized. Easter's resources were scattered across the island:
the best stone for the statues was quarried at Rano Raraku near Easter's northeast end; red stone, used for large crowns adorning
some of the statues, was quarried at Puna Pau, inland in the southwest; stone carving tools came mostly from Aroi in the northwest.
Meanwhile, the best farmland lay in the south and east, and the best fishing grounds on the north and west coasts. Extracting
and redistributing all those goods required complex political organization. What happened to that organization, and how could
it ever have arisen in such a barren landscape?
mysteries have spawned volumes of speculation for more than two and a half centuries. Many Europeans were incredulous that
Polynesians-commonly characterized as "mere savages"-could have created the statues or the beautifully constructed stone platforms.
In the 1950s, Heyerdahl argued that Polynesia must have been settled by advanced societies of American
Indians, who in turn must have received civilization across the Atlantic from more advanced societies
of the Old World. Heyerdahl's raft voyages aimed to prove the feasibility of such prehistoric transoceanic
contacts. In the 1960s the Swiss writer Erich von Daeniken, an ardent believer in Earth visits by extraterrestrial astronauts,
went further, claiming that Easter's statues were the work of intelligent beings who owned ultramodern tools, became stranded
on Easter, and were finally rescued.
Heyerdahl and Von Daeniken both brushed aside
overwhelming evidence that the Easter Islanders were typical Polynesians derived from Asia rather than
from the Americas and that their culture (including their
statues) grew out of Polynesian culture. Their language was Polynesian, as Cook had already concluded. Specifically, they
spoke an eastern Polynesian dialect related to Hawaiian and Marquesan, a dialect isolated since about A.D. 400, as estimated
from slight differences in vocabulary. Their fishhooks and stone adzes resembled early Marquesan models. Last year DNA extracted
from 12 Easter Island skeletons was also shown to be Polynesian. The islanders grew bananas, taro,
sweet potatoes, sugarcane, and paper mulberry-typical Polynesian crops, mostly of Southeast Asian origin. Their sole domestic
animal, the chicken, was also typically Polynesian and ultimately Asian, as were the rats that arrived as stowaways in the
canoes of the first settlers.
What happened to those settlers? The fanciful
theories of the past must give way to evidence gathered by hardworking practitioners in three fields: archeology, pollen analysis,
and paleontology. Modern archeological excavations on Easter have continued since Heyerdahl's 1955 expedition. The earliest
radiocarbon dates associated with human activities are around A.D. 400 to 700, in reasonable agreement with the approximate
settlement date of 400 estimated by linguists. The period of statue construction peaked around 1200 to 1500, with few if any
statues erected thereafter. Densities of archeological sites suggest a large population; an estimate of 7,000 people is widely
quoted by archeologists, but other estimates range up to 20,000, which does not seem implausible for an island
of Easter's area and fertility.
Archeologists have also enlisted surviving
islanders in experiments aimed at figuring out how the statues might have been carved and erected. Twenty people, using only
stone chisels, could have carved even the largest completed statue within a year. Given enough timber and fiber for making
ropes, teams of at most a few hundred people could have loaded the statues onto wooden sleds, dragged them over lubricated
wooden tracks or rollers, and used logs as levers to maneuver them into a standing position. Rope could have been made from
the fiber of a small native tree, related to the linden, called the hauhau. However, that tree is now extremely scarce on
Easter, and hauling one statue would have required hundreds of yards of rope. Did Easter's now barren landscape once support
the necessary trees? That question can be answered by the technique of pollen analysis, which involves boring out a column
of sediment from a swamp or pond, with the most recent deposits at the top and relatively more ancient deposits at the bottom.
The absolute age of each layer can be dated by radiocarbon methods. Then begins the hard work: examining tens of thousands
of pollen grains under a microscope, counting them, and identifying the plant species that produced each one by comparing
the grains with modern pollen from known plant species. For Easter Island, the bleary-eyed scientists
who performed that task were John Flenley, now at Massey University
in New Zealand, and Sarah King of the University
of Hull in England.
Flenley and King's heroic efforts were rewarded
by the striking new picture that emerged of Easter's prehistoric landscape. For at least 30,000 years before human arrival
and during the early years of Polynesian settlement, Easter was not a wasteland at all. Instead, a subtropical forest of trees
and woody bushes towered over a ground layer of shrubs, herbs, ferns, and grasses. In the forest grew tree daisies, the rope-yielding
hauhau tree, and the toromiro tree, which furnishes a dense, mesquite-like firewood. The most common tree in the forest was
a species of palm now absent on Easter but formerly so abundant that the bottom strata of the sediment column were packed
with its pollen. The Easter Island palm was closely related to the still-surviving Chilean wine palm,
which grows up to 82 feet tall and 6 feet in diameter. The tall, unbranched trunks of the Easter Island
palm would have been ideal for transporting and erecting statues and constructing large canoes. The palm would also have been
a valuable food source, since its Chilean relative yields edible nuts as well as sap from which Chileans make sugar, syrup,
honey, and wine.
What did the first settlers of Easter
Island eat when they were not glutting themselves on the local equivalent of maple syrup? Recent excavations by
David Steadman, of the New York State Museum
at Albany, have yielded a picture of Easter's original animal world as surprising
as Flenley and King's picture of its plant world. Steadman's expectations for Easter were conditioned by his experiences elsewhere
in Polynesia, where fish are overwhelmingly the main food at archeological sites, typically accounting
for more than 90 percent of the bones in ancient Polynesian garbage heaps. Easter, though, is too cool for the coral reefs
beloved by fish, and its cliff-girded coastline permits shallow-water fishing in only a few places. Less than a quarter of
the bones in its early garbage heaps (from the period 900 to 1300) belonged to fish; instead, nearly one-third of all bones
came from porpoises.
Nowhere else in Polynesia
do porpoises account for even 1 percent of discarded food bones. But most other Polynesian islands offered animal food in
the form of birds and mammals, such as New Zealand's now extinct
giant moas and Hawaii's now extinct flightless geese. Most other islanders also
had domestic pigs and dogs. On Easter, porpoises would have been the largest animal available-other than humans. The porpoise
species identified at Easter, the common dolphin, weighs up to 165 pounds. It generally lives out at sea, so it could not
have been hunted by line fishing or spearfishing from shore. Instead, it must have been harpooned far offshore, in big seaworthy
canoes built from the extinct palm tree.
In addition to porpoise meat, Steadman found,
the early Polynesian settlers were feasting on seabirds. For those birds, Easter's remoteness and lack of predators made it
an ideal haven as a breeding site, at least until humans arrived. Among the prodigious numbers of seabirds that bred on Easter
were albatross, boobies, frigate birds, fulmars, petrels, prions, shearwaters, storm petrels, terns, and tropic birds. With
at least 25 nesting species, Easter was the richest seabird breeding site in Polynesia and probably
in the whole Pacific. Land birds as well went into early Easter Island cooking pots.
Steadman identified bones of at least six species,
including barn owls, herons, parrots, and rail. Bird stew would have been seasoned with meat from large numbers of rats, which
the Polynesian colonists inadvertently brought with them; Easter Island is the sole known Polynesian
island where rat bones outnumber fish bones at archeological sites. (In case you're squeamish and consider rats inedible,
I still recall recipes for creamed laboratory rat that my British biologist friends used to supplement their diet during their
years of wartime food rationing.)
Porpoises, seabirds, land birds, and rats did
not complete the list of meat sources formerly available on Easter. A few bones hint at the possibility of breeding seal colonies
as well. All these delicacies were cooked in ovens fired by wood from the island's forests.
Such evidence lets us imagine the island onto
which Easter's first Polynesian colonists stepped ashore some 1,600 years ago, after a long canoe voyage from eastern Polynesia.
They found themselves in a pristine paradise. What then happened to it? The pollen grains and the bones yield a grim answer.
Pollen records show that destruction of Easter's
forests was well under way by the year 800, just a few centuries after the start of human settlement. Then charcoal from wood
fires came to fill the sediment cores, while pollen of palms and other trees and woody shrubs decreased or disappeared, and
pollen of the grasses that replaced the forest became more abundant. Not long after 1400 the palm finally became extinct,
not only as a result of being chopped down but also because the now ubiquitous rats prevented its regeneration: of the dozens
of preserved palm nuts discovered in caves on Easter, all had been chewed by rats and could no longer germinate. While the
hauhau tree did not become extinct in Polynesian times, its numbers declined drastically until there weren't enough left to
make ropes from. By the time Heyerdahl visited Easter, only a single, nearly dead toromiro tree remained on the island, and
even that lone survivor has now disappeared. (Fortunately, the toromiro still grows in botanical gardens elsewhere.)
The fifteenth century marked the end not only
for Easter's palm but for the forest itself. Its doom had been approaching as people cleared land to plant gardens; as they
felled trees to build canoes, to transport and erect statues, and to burn; as rats devoured seeds; and probably as the native
birds died out that had pollinated the trees' flowers and dispersed their fruit. The overall picture is among the most extreme
examples of forest destruction anywhere in the world: the whole forest gone, and most of its tree species extinct.
The destruction of the island's animals was
as extreme as that of the forest: without exception, every species of native land bird became extinct. Even shellfish were
overexploited, until people had to settle for small sea snails instead of larger cowries. Porpoise bones disappeared abruptly
from garbage heaps around 1500; no one could harpoon porpoises anymore, since the trees used for constructing the big seagoing
canoes no longer existed. The colonies of more than half of the seabird species breeding on Easter or on its offshore islets
were wiped out.
In place of these meat supplies, the Easter
Islanders intensified their production of chickens, which had been only an occasional food item. They also turned to the largest
remaining meat source available: humans, whose bones became common in late Easter Island garbage heaps.
Oral traditions of the islanders are rife with cannibalism; the most inflammatory taunt that could be snarled at an enemy
was "The flesh of your mother sticks between my teeth." With no wood available to cook these new goodies, the islanders resorted
to sugarcane scraps, grass, and sedges to fuel their fires.
All these strands of evidence can be wound
into a coherent narrative of a society's decline and fall. The first Polynesian colonists found themselves on an island with
fertile soil, abundant food, bountiful building materials, ample lebensraum, and all the prerequisites for comfortable living.
They prospered and multiplied.
After a few centuries, they began erecting
stone statues on platforms, like the ones their Polynesian forebears had carved. With passing years, the statues and platforms
became larger and larger, and the statues began sporting ten-ton red crowns-probably in an escalating spiral of one-upmanship,
as rival clans tried to surpass each other with shows of wealth and power. (In the same way, successive Egyptian pharaohs
built ever-larger pyramids. Today Hollywood movie moguls near my home in Los Angeles
are displaying their wealth and power by building ever more ostentatious mansions. Tycoon Marvin Davis topped previous moguls
with plans for a 50,000-square-foot house, so now Aaron Spelling has topped Davis
with a 56,000-square-foot house. All that those buildings lack to make the message explicit are ten-ton red crowns.) On Easter,
as in modern America, society was held together by a complex
political system to redistribute locally available resources and to integrate the economies of different areas.
Eventually Easter's growing population was
cutting the forest more rapidly than the forest was regenerating. The people used the land for gardens and the wood for fuel,
canoes, and houses-and, of course, for lugging statues. As forest disappeared, the islanders ran out of timber and rope to
transport and erect their statues. Life became more uncomfortable-springs and streams dried up, and wood was no longer available
People also found it harder to fill their stomachs,
as land birds, large sea snails, and many seabirds disappeared. Because timber for building seagoing canoes vanished, fish
catches declined and porpoises disappeared from the table. Crop yields also declined, since deforestation allowed the soil
to be eroded by rain and wind, dried by the sun, and its nutrients to be leeched from it. Intensified chicken production and
cannibalism replaced only part of all those lost foods. Preserved statuettes with sunken cheeks and visible ribs suggest that
people were starving.
With the disappearance of food surpluses, Easter
Island could no longer feed the chiefs, bureaucrats, and priests who had kept a complex society running. Surviving
islanders described to early European visitors how local chaos replaced centralized government and a warrior class took over
from the hereditary chiefs. The stone points of spears and daggers, made by the warriors during their heyday in the 1600s
and 1700s, still litter the ground of Easter today. By around 1700, the population began to crash toward between one-quarter
and one-tenth of its former number. People took to living in caves for protection against their enemies. Around 1770 rival
clans started to topple each other's statues, breaking the heads off. By 1864 the last statue had been thrown down and desecrated.
As we try to imagine the decline of Easter's
civilization, we ask ourselves, "Why didn't they look around, realize what they were doing, and stop before it was too late?
What were they thinking when they cut down the last palm tree?"
I suspect, though, that the disaster happened
not with a bang but with a whimper. After all, there are those hundreds of abandoned statues to consider. The forest the islanders
depended on for rollers and rope didn't simply disappear one day-it vanished slowly, over decades. Perhaps war interrupted
the moving teams; perhaps by the time the carvers had finished their work, the last rope snapped. In the meantime, any islander
who tried to warn about the dangers of progressive deforestation would have been overridden by vested interests of carvers,
bureaucrats, and chiefs, whose jobs depended on continued deforestation. Our Pacific Northwest loggers
are only the latest in a long line of loggers to cry, "Jobs over trees!" The changes in forest cover from year to year would
have been hard to detect: yes, this year we cleared those woods over there, but trees are starting to grow back again on this
abandoned garden site here. Only older people, recollecting their childhoods decades earlier, could have recognized a difference.
Their children could no more have comprehended their parents' tales than my eight-year-old sons today can comprehend my wife's
and my tales of what Los Angeles was like 30 years ago.
Gradually trees became fewer, smaller, and
less important. By the time the last fruit-bearing adult palm tree was cut, palms had long since ceased to be of economic
significance. That left only smaller and smaller palm saplings to clear each year, along with other bushes and treelets. No
one would have noticed the felling of the last small palm.
By now the meaning of Easter Island
for us should be chillingly obvious. Easter Island is Earth writ small. Today, again, a rising population
confronts shrinking resources. We too have no emigration valve, because all human societies are linked by international transport,
and we can no more escape into space than the Easter Islanders could flee into the ocean. If we continue to follow our present
course, we shall have exhausted the world's major fisheries, tropical rain forests, fossil fuels, and much of our soil by
the time my sons reach my current age.
Every day newspapers report details of famished
countries-Afghanistan, Liberia, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Somalia, the former Yugoslavia, Zaire-where soldiers have appropriated
the wealth or where central government is yielding to local gangs of thugs. With the risk of nuclear war receding, the threat
of our ending with a bang no longer has a chance of galvanizing us to halt our course. Our risk now is of winding down, slowly,
in a whimper. Corrective action is blocked by vested interests, by well-intentioned political and business leaders, and by
their electorates, all of whom are perfectly correct in not noticing big changes from year to year. Instead, each year there
are just somewhat more people, and somewhat fewer resources, on Earth. It would be easy to close our eyes or to give up in
despair. If mere thousands of Easter Islanders with only stone tools and their own muscle power sufficed to destroy their
society, how can billions of people with metal tools and machine power fail to do worse? But there is one crucial difference.
The Easter Islanders had no books and no histories of other doomed societies. Unlike the Easter Islanders, we have histories
of the past-information that can save us. My main hope for my sons' generation is that we may now choose to learn from the
fates of societies like Easter's.
This scenario of collapse has been repeated in Africa—though gradually. Tanzania,
for example, has hyper inflation. Its economy has collapsed. Increasing woe has been repeated in Sudan, Ethiopia,
Republic of the Congo, Zambia, and throughout most of Southern
Africa. In the Republic
of the Congo, with the failure of the maintenance of the roads that supported lumbering, the communities
which grew up in that region have crumbled and its peoples vanished. The developed
nations are not immune. Population rather than resources pose the greatest risk.