Full size of the Moai Statues! (Easter Island)

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth
That is so cool. I would not have even thought about carvings being made onto the buried portion of the statues. So cool.

Of course you wouldn't.... that's likely because they weren't. They couldn't have been buried that deeply or probably at all when they were first made. You don't go to the effort of carving detailed carvings to have them completlely hidden.

It won't change the age of them at all.... that requires so called scientists to rework theories which means losing grants and being proven the incompetent non-thinking morons that most of them are.

Jaden

Originally posted by Masterjaden


It won't change the age of them at all.... that requires so called scientists to rework theories which means losing grants and being proven the incompetent non-thinking morons that most of them are.

Jaden

Theories are reworked constantly, grant are given for NEW research and those that find new things are given more money, tenure, book deals and maybe a special on National Geographic. I would point out that over the last 150 years our view of our past and ourselves has been completely re-written numerous times - and all that by what you call 'non-thinking morons', lol

i dont think the people buried them in the ground. over time, natural winds would have blown sand around them.

Originally posted by Whaaat
i dont think the people buried them in the ground. over time, natural winds would have blown sand around them.

Water erosion mainly and Easter Island has lava based soil

Currently, Easter Island's rates of soil erosion are still extremely high, mostly due to illegal burns and overgrazing. With the soils being lost at a higher rate than they are formed, there is going to be a time when there is no more soil to lose and the landscape will change into a large mass of dark rocks, putting in danger the tourist activity of the Island (the main income for the local community), not to mention the lives of the islanders themselves.

Soil guy

I noticed a change in the shape of Rano Roratka had occurred in just in the twenty-eight years between my 1977 visit and 2005

Were the statues burried or did they sink to the depth that they are and if they sank has anyone estimated how long it would take for them to sink and therefore give a estimate of how old they are?

Originally posted by guitarplayer
Were the statues burried or did they sink to the depth that they are and if they sank has anyone estimated how long it would take for them to sink and therefore give a estimate of how old they are?

They didn't sink but are down slope from an eroding volcano - the rock of which they were cut from comes from that same site

An ongoing study by archaeologists Terry Hunt and Carl Lipo suggests a still–later date: “Radiocarbon dates for the earliest stratigraphic layers at Anakena, Easter Island, and analysis of previous radiocarbon dates imply that the island was colonized late, about 1200 CE. Significant ecological impacts and major cultural investments in monumental architecture and statuary thus began soon after initial settlement

Terry Hunt's paper abstract

Earlier estimates ranged from 300-1070 CE

Added material

More recent study on the dates of Polynesian colonization of the eastern islands

2011 study

Conclusion from that study

Improvements in the reliability of radiocarbon dating, including
greater rigor in the selection, identification and pretreatment of
samples, together with a rapid increase in the total size of the
radiocarbon date assemblage for East Polynesia, provide the
conditions necessary for constructing a reliable model of the
regional chronology of colonization. The model presented here
has the advantages of a geographically wide coverage and a large
sample of radiocarbon dates that was selected systematically by
the elimination of poor quality and imprecise data. The results
show that, after a relatively brief period of establishment in
central East Polynesia, there was a remarkably rapid and extensive
dispersal in the thirteenth century A.D. to the remaining
uninhabited islands. This rate of human expansion is unprecedented
in oceanic prehistory. Our model, although falsifiable, is
likely to prove robust with further high precision radiocarbon
dating of short-lived materials from those East Polynesian islands
that currently lack secure chronologies based on such
materials.

reply to post by bigern


That is a good thought. I was astonished to see that these were that large and what would it take to form that monster in the first place. I wrote a book on biblical giants some years ago but this has really renewed my interest in my giants of this world.

Who knows... Given the pose on the buried portion, I could see some act of sticking the statues into a hole in the ground as being part of an Earth fertility ritual. Say if a statue represents something like a chieftain's family lineage, wouldn't they want to claim the bounty of the Earth as being it's offspring? This whole practice could have started as a "Who's your daddy?" taunt to the other tribes within the culture. (One would have to know about the culture better though to be sure, but with lack of historical records that may be difficult.)

This situation would then escalate given the kind of rivalry some tribal cultures could support. The bigger the statue put in the ground, and the deeper it could get in, the bigger paternal stake a tribe would have on the Earth's offspring. I could see that happening.

If partially buried on purpose, they won't be as old as the sediment piling up hypothesis would lead to.

Originally posted by pauljs75
Who knows... Given the pose on the buried portion, I could see some act of sticking the statues into a hole in the ground as being part of an Earth fertility ritual. Say if a statue represents something like a chieftain's family lineage, wouldn't they want to claim the bounty of the Earth as being it's offspring?

Good point. A very plausible theory indeed.

Were all of the moai statues buried that deep or just some of them?

The glyphs on the back of the more recent excavated Moai statues on the EISP look very egyptian.



I can't personally buy into islanders erecting over 800 statues, some as tall as in the OP's post. Who knows what could be under there. The theory that the islanders built these statues in a craze and depleted their resources in combination with natural disaster based on "the barren land" and lack of resources is weak. I mean, it's Easter Island, we need a lot more research and exploration to make such detailed assumptions as I've seen on TV.

Perhaps leaving ancient sites so preserved is the wrong idea. I don't mean tearing down the Pyramid walls or anything, I just mean further excavation and analysis of the grounds of which these sites are built on. There's most likely a ton more buried that we have missed so closely or haven't gotten close to. Looking under the pyramids would be cool, or digging the ground near Stonehenge, or further exploration of the Nazca Lines. It needs to be done! I can't handle all of the questions I have.

reply to post by murkraz


Howdy

Do you have a link to Moai/egyptian claim. I question it as the stone is the wrong colour.

Easter Island is one of the more well researched sites, From Routledge to now Hunt there hasn't been a year in the last century when there wasn't at least one expedition there, often there are multiple ones.

Just wanted to add some fun stuff about the statues..

"Earlier accounts recorded by visitors to the island indicate that statues were ordered to walk by the mythical King Tuu Ku Ihu and the god Make Make. Even specialized priests were known to move moai at the request of those who wanted them on their family land or ahu."

"Archaeologist Jo Anne Van Tilburg, who has studied the moai for many years, believes the statues may have been created in the image of various paramount chiefs. They were not individualized portrait sculptures, but standardized representations of powerful individuals. The moai may also hold a sacred role in the life of the Rapa Nui, acting as ceremonial conduits for communication with the gods. According to Van Tilburg, their physical position between earth and sky puts them on both secular and sacred ground; secular in their representation of chief and their ability to physically prop up the sky, and sacred in their proximity to the heavenly gods. Van Tilburg concludes, "The moai thus mediates between sky and earth, people and chiefs, and chiefs and gods."

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by Masterjaden


It won't change the age of them at all.... that requires so called scientists to rework theories which means losing grants and being proven the incompetent non-thinking morons that most of them are.

Jaden

Theories are reworked constantly, grant are given for NEW research and those that find new things are given more money, tenure, book deals and maybe a special on National Geographic. I would point out that over the last 150 years our view of our past and ourselves has been completely re-written numerous times - and all that by what you call 'non-thinking morons', lol

Wrong.... Theories are reworked when evidences don't fit, but that is all, they are only reworked tweaked to fit...Even when evidences disprove the theory completely, they find a way with contrived information to keep theories that should be thrown out...

Jaden

reply to post by Masterjaden


yep; you can find around 5,000 theories, disproven, discarded and some still going in the book, 'Dictionary of Theories', by Jennifer Bothamley, ISBN 1-57859-045-0

great pic and thank you for posting the link im sure excavation is or would be performed in secret. the question is were they there long enough to sink that deep or did the earth around the build up natrally?

we can just the people in controll dont want to if things were made that way there would be no economy. but on the flip side if things were made that way truly intelligent people could use their minds to advance society instead of wasting energy on trying to just scrape by. people do not think on a grand scale now they actually have a few people with all the money that in thier ignorance believe they are important when in actuality the world would get by without thier "im great im the king adittude" thoes people dont contribute anything but hardships on the rest of the world.

reply to post by anthaltie


Keep something secret on Easter Island, hahahaha, no the place is very small the population nows everyone else and strangers stick out like, well, like tourists. Except for the area around the town a bit father east there are no trees on Easter Island. Its wide open to observation. There are legitimate excavations and others scholars there on yearly basis .....really really hard to hide a exc here.

Sorry no 'secret' excavations taking place unless of course you could get into one of the lava tube tunnels but then what do you do for food?

Originally posted by Headeraser
"Earlier accounts recorded by visitors to the island indicate that statues were ordered to walk by the mythical King Tuu Ku Ihu and the god Make Make. Even specialized priests were known to move moai at the request of those who wanted them on their family land or ahu."

I think traditionally we've been too quick to discard myths and legends as imaginary tales, but clearly most ancient cultures do not regard them as such, but as actual events that happened. There are some conventional theories on how these moai were moved around, but none of them are very believable or explain why some of the moai are perched high up on ledges that are barely accessible by foot (and not accessible at all as far as transporting enormous sculptures). How were they moved? Well perhaps we should listen to the locals, and they say they were "commanded to walk". IE, people did not move them using conventional means- rollers, ropes, etc. Somehow they made the statues move on their own. How? Well that's what we should be asking instead of exploring conventional theories. Figuring out how they were "commanded to walk" could unlock the answers to many of our questions as to how ancient monuments were built, and change the way we approach modern construction. Clearly there was some technology or method used that has now been lost to us, we should be trying to get that back instead of convincing ourselves that they rolled around 82 ton moai on logs with a few burly guys.

PS- there was a modern attempt to move a small (9 ton) moai via rocking it back and forth (an attempt to prove that people could "walk" them to transport them, thus explaining the legend), but what they discovered is that the base was severely damaged in the process so they quit the attempt. It seems obvious that moving them in such a way would have required levitating them somehow. There are legends in other cultures about large stones or statues being levitated by playing certain music or singing certain tones, so it seems we've lost some technique that was well known to the ancients.

reply to post by SavedOne

There are some conventional theories on how these moai were moved around, but none of them are very believable or explain why some of the moai are perched high up on ledges that are barely accessible by foot (and not accessible at all as far as transporting enormous sculptures).

"ledges"? Where might those be? I ask as I've been to all of the Moai sites and don't recall such a positional problem. You may be mistaking moai for easter island petroglyphs - which are in some pretty odd places

reply to post by Bonkrh


Sorry, I haven't read the whole thread but the picture is amazing. Did the statues sink that far or were they dug in that deep? Seems kinda weird to decorate the bottoms of the statues if they did bury them. Of course, building mutiple Giant statues with giant hats to top them off in of itself, is kinda weird to begin with.........