Moai facing inland at Ahu Tongariki essay

Investigating the Importance of Moai
Moai are monolithic human sculptures on Easter Island produced by the Rapa Nui people between 1250 and 1500 (Liller, 1989). Most archaeologists argue that Moai symbolized power and authority in political and religious settings (Richards et al., 2011). For instance, carved stones were used in ancient religious rituals associated with magical spiritual power known as Mana. Archaeologists also suggest Moai represented ancient Polynesian ancestors(Liller, 1989). The objects were positioned to face the villages away from the oceans and were believed to watch over the islanders(Hamilton, 2013). Moreover, a study revealed that ancient people in Polynesia believed they could improve soil fertility and food supply by quarrying stone carvings (Sherwood et al., 2019). Some of these statues have Pukao, which are hat-like structures representing the topknot of their leaders. Again, some designs were identified on the posteriors and backs of less eroded Moai. Scholars demonstrated a connection between these designs and Polynesian ancient tattooing practices, which were later discouraged by missionaries (Routledge, 1911). The statues are also believed to have had astronomical importance because evidence suggests that the early Easter Island was a well-stratified society consisting of experts in different fields, including astronomers. However, there is no evidence to substantiate this claim. This paper will argue that the statues mainly symbolize power and authority that promoted prosperity.
Description of Moai
The sculptures were made from volcanic ash, and the carvers would outline the human figures in the rock wall first, then chip the material until the image was developed (Lipo et al., 2013). The oversized heads have elongated noses and heavy brows.The statues also have elongated ears with an oblong shape. They have heavy torsos, and clavicles are outlined faintly. The artists carved the arms in bas relief and made them rest against the body. The anatomical attributes of the sculptures’ backs are mostly less detailed. The kneeling Moai stands out as the only statue with clearly visible legs.The carvings still faced the inland across the community’s land during the Europeans’ first arrival to the island in 1722, but none were standing by the late 19th century (Lipo & Hunt, 2014). The statues were toppled in the late 18th century, and their change in stature can be attributed to internecine tribal wars and European contact. The tallest Moai ever created, Paro, was about 10 meters high with a weight of 82 tonnes (Tilburg, 2009). Typically one complete sculpture would have been about 21 meters tall with an approximate Weightof 145 to 165 tons.
Figure 1
Moai facing inland at Ahu Tongariki

(Binghamton University, 2002)

Culture
The Moai are associated with the Rapa Nui people, who were indigenous to Easter Island. Oral traditions suggest that the sculptures were produced by highly skilled artists whose status was comparable to that of influential and powerful members of other Polynesian craft guilds (Fischer, 2006). Most of the old customs introduced by westerners continued in many places, but the island stood out as they increasingly portrayed distinct cultures (Liller, 1989). The island was shared among his six children when the first king died. Many islanders inhabited areas near the coast. As per the norm, whenever a chieftain passed away, he was remembered througha Moai carved from porous volcanic stone and set up on an Ahu by the settlement. It is believed that the earliest carvings were probably crude (Liller, 1989). However, these artisans became increasingly more skilled as the population grew, making the statues more sophisticated. Historians also revealed subdivisions in Raku quarry where each clan had its territory.
Interpretation
It is argued that the statues symbolized power and authority in religious and political spheres (Richards et al., 2011). This is because they represented dead chiefs believed to have descended directly from the gods and whose superhuman powers could be exploited for the benefit of humanity. These ancestors were also believed to watch over the islanders as the statues faced inland (Liller, 1989). Therefore, the objects depicted individuals considered supernatural leaders, which relates to religious and political authority. Producers and users of these art pieces considered them actual repositories of sacred spirit.According to ancient Polynesian religions, properly designed and ritualized carvings had a magical power known as Mana(Richards et al., 2011).Therefore, skillful artisans were also respected as they played a significant role in connecting people with the gods through their works of art. It is argued that these expert masters, known as Maori in the Rapa Nui dialect, gained social recognition through their artwork, enhancing their social status(Sherwood et al., 2019). Therefore, this hard-earned talent among carvers ensured the prosperity of their lineages as it was passed across generations cementing their families’ prominence in society.
It is also argued that the Moai promoted fertility as the chief ancestors embodied Mana and could guarantee food supply by influencing nature (Sherwood et al., 2019). Shore (1989) also argues that ancient Polynesians’ social life mainly involved practices seen as transactions between people and gods. The communities believed that gods’ powers could be transmitted genealogically. Therefore, the Rapa Nui people believed that Mana was a generative potency they could access from deities and transform it through ritual transactions to ensure efficacy and success. Hence, religion involved beliefs and practices aimed at transforming Mana ritually (Shore 1989). Sahlins (1989) argues that rituals were regarded as exceptionally potent practices that facilitated the appearance of ancestors in the living through the emergence and actualization of history.
Other researchers suggest that the Moai were more than symbolic objects and may have had astronomical significance (Liller, 1989). This school of thought is based on the notion that ancient Polynesian societies were sophisticated and comprised a wide range of skillful professionals, including astronomers. Liller (1989) argues that the statues’ orientation and location may have been informed by astronomical considerations relating to the rising and setting sun.
Discussion
The interpretation that Moai symbolized power and authority from religious and political perspectives to ensure prosperity stands out as the most logical point of view. There is substantial evidence indicating that the statues were ritual objects associated with power and authority according to Polynesian cultures. For instance, Richards et al (2011) demonstrate how Rapa Nui people utilized the Ahu platforms of Easter Island as sanctuaries believing they could harness power from the statues. The author refers to the iconographic and archaeological analysis, which suggest that the statue cult was informed by ideologies of lineage-centered male authority that incorporate anthropomorphic symbolism (Richards et al., 2011). The author points out that the sacred power was only believed to exist among members of the ruling class as they were considered relatives to the gods. Therefore, people expected the chieftain ancestors to possess blessings passed down upon them from the earliest chief. Moreover, the association of the statues with power and respect is also demonstrated among the artisans who enjoyed the prestige of possessing carving skills. Maintenance of the artisan profession within privileged lineages is also thought to have contributed to the emergence of different classes of experts. This argument is convincing because Sherwood et al. (2019) also reveal that additional elements, such as petroglyphs at the back of the carvings, only emerged later in the Polynesian culture upon the sophistication of the carving art. Sherwood (2019) also helped to substantiate the argument associating the statues with power and social status because she revealed that the artisans were respected members of society, not expected to participate in other forms of manual labor. Therefore, most researchers agree and substantiate that Moai represented power and authority.
Moreover, Sherwood et al. (2019) also successfully demonstrate the association between the statues and prosperity in the Polynesian communities. For instance, she reveals evidence of farming activities close to the Moai, suggesting that the carvings were used to promote agricultural success. Sherwood (2019) highlights botanical evidence of banana and sweet potato cultivars, implying that moai sculptures were used for rituals associated with fertility. Furthermore, the petroglyphs at the back of these carvings created unique tableaus associated with the Orojo ritualistic platform (Routledge, 1919). These images resemble Tanaja Manu, one of the most distinct iconography of the “birdman” cult believed to promote fertility (Routledge, 1919). Hamilton (2013) also highlights this prosperity aspect by demonstrating how Moai represented protection and safety by facing away from the ocean. Therefore, there is sufficient evidence indicating how the Rapa Naku people utilized Moai to ensure safety and adequate food supply, which promotes prosperity.
However, the argument that Moai were astronomical statues seems weak. While the objects seem to point align with the moon and point where the sun sets during an equinox, there is no evidence to prove that they were ever used for this purpose. Therefore, their orientation and position in relation to the sun may have never been intentional. Hence, there is a need for further research to substantiate this claim.
Conclusion
Based on available evidence, Moai sculptures were symbolic objects representing power and authority to promote success and efficacy. They focused on preserving chief ancestors’ memory because the Polynesian community highly regarded them and believed they could promote agricultural sustainability and safety. The statues also rendered the artisan crucial members of society as their artwork facilitated their relationship with the gods. For the argument stressing the astronomical significance of the statues, the idea is subject to further research as the perspective seems inconclusive.

References
Binghamton University. (2002). Easter Island society did not collapse prior to European contact, new research shows. Binghamton University. https://www.binghamton.edu/news/story/2259/easter-island-society-did-not-collapse-prior-to-european-contact-new-research-shows
Fischer, S. (2006). Island at the end of the world. Reaktion Books.
Hamilton, S. (2013). Rapa Nui (Easter Island)’s stone worlds. Archaeology International, 16(2012-2013), 96–109. https://doi.org/10.5334/ai.1613
Liller, W. (1989). The megalithic astronomy of Easter Island: Orientations of Ahu and Moai. Journal for the History of Astronomy, 20(13), S21–S48. https://doi.org/10.1177/002182868902001303
Lipo, C., Hunt, T., & Haoa, S. (2013). The “walking” megalithic statues (Moai) of Easter Island. Journal of Archaeological Science, 40(6), 2859–2866. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2012.09.029
Richards, C., Croucher, K., Paoa, T., Parish, T., Tucki, E., & Welham, K. (2011). Road my body goes: Re-creating ancestors from stone at the great moai quarry of Rano Raraku, Rapa Nui (Easter Island). World Archaeology, 43(2), 191–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.2011.579483
Routledge, K. (1911). The mystery of Easter Island: The story of an expedition. University of Michigan Library.
Sherwood, S., Tilburg, J., Barrier, C., Horrocks, M., Dunn, R. K., & Ramírez-Aliaga, J. (2019). New excavations in Easter Island’s statue quarry: Soil fertility, site formation and chronology. Journal of Archaeological Science, 111, 104994. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2019.104994
Tilburg, J. (2009). Moai Paro digital reconstruction. Easter Island Statue Project. http://www.eisp.org/1954/
Tilburg, J. (2021). Rock art on excavated monolithic statues (moa), Rano Raraku statue quarry, Rapa Nui (Easter Island): Context, chronology and the crescent motif. Archaeology in Oceania, 56(3), 239–266. https://doi.org/10.1002/arco.5253