by Tanada » Fri 22 Aug 2014, 09:56:47
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('HARM', 'W')hen the Dutch colonizers arrived in 1722, they described the landscape as barren and denuded of trees, as well as cannibalism being practiced by the relatively few survivors. Unless of course, you believe Jared Dimaond, Hunt & Lipo, National Geographic and a billion other respected sources are complete liars.
Of course Europeans also brought a lot of nasty diseases that did not help. Nonetheless, it's quite clear that the Easter Islanders had already decimated their own population via ecocide --with little or no help from Europeans.
Actually they did no such thing, the Dutch Admiral in charge called the island lush, and the people well fed, healthy and happy. Of course the Dutch were explorers, not colonizers so they had no special interest in their description of the island. When Colonizers started showing up 50 years later you get the claims that the natives were engaged in a civil war, were mal-nourished, and had stripped the island of trees leaving them without resources for survival.
Archeology shows that these claims were patently false and self serving for the Spanish colonizers. The Maoi statues were carefully lowered from the upright position to face down, not toppled over destructively in some civil war. Testing proved that if you push a statue over and let it fall it breaks, however nearly all of them were gently lowered down.
Of course the fact that the Spanish sent Catholic Priests in to convert the natives away from the Maoi and Birdman faiths into the Catholic faith could have something to do with it.
When the Spanish arrived the majority of the island was covered with lithiculture fields that had been built over generations. The fields grew abundant crops of Yams and Cassava, and the families or tribes raised chickens for meat. In supplement to this the people fished and gathered wild birds, wild fruits and other natural resources.
There is no evidence of a civil war, no evidence of large scale cannibalism, no evidence for self inflicted ecocide. The ecocide that took place was when a Spanish 'governor' appointed to 'take care' of the island imported Moreno sheep from Australia and forbid the natives who had survived the waves of plague and slave raids to keep them out of the fields. The Rapa Nui people were marginalized by the ever growing sheep herd until they were squeezed down into a tiny portion of the island. There certainly was Ecocide, along with genocide, but it was not the natives who committed it.
I enjoy reading Jared Diamonds work, but he is a linguist/ornithologist. His theories are interesting and deserve to be tested, but in the case of Easter Island and Greenland archeology has demonstrated his theories were mistaken. That does not make him a bad person or even a bad scientist. The whole point of science is to look at a situation with new eyes, propose a new theory, and test that theory based on solid evidence.
My own interest is in history so I watched the documentary on Netflix. The Archeological evidence supports the same pattern repeated over and over in the 1400-1950 period of modern history. Europeans explored vast numbers of new places and in the process unintentionally introduced a whole slew of diseases that caused social disruption. Just like the Black Death did in Europe in the 1200-1600 period these waves of new diseases cut down the population like the Grim Reaper. Just like Europe those places left undisturbed for a hundred years recovered, like the pacific coast of North America. In those places the native population rebounded and they maintained their culture in an altered form. In the USA/Canada the native population had recovered enough that when settlers arrived en mass at the end of the 1800's their culture survived. The only native languages thriving today are in the pacific northwest and Alaska. Rapa Nui was 'colonized' in the early period just like Massachusetts Bay. The native population was shrinking rapidly from disease and the culture was in chaos. Having people show up in the Chaos and tell you it was Gods Will because of your religion certainly did nothing to help. Hauling in the sheep in the mid 1800's was just the ecocide death blow, without the diseases and cultural chaos the population would have been large enough, organized enough, to resist being replaced by sheep monoculture.