<< 1 >>
Rating: data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a1ec5/a1ec560d31997acb7dd2692b78e6ce4e8bb54cba" alt="2 stars" Summary: Much speculation on little evidence poorly presented Review: This 372-page hardback consisting of 10 chapters totalling 286 pages,two appendices of 24 and 46 pages respectively, a lengthy bibliographyand a good index, is an attempt at reconstituting the prehistory of Polynesian migration to Easter Island in the light of the evidence from a modern indigenous manuscript ("Manuscript E") of uncertain authorship, reproduced in full in the second appendix, pp. 304-356, the first mention of which dates only from 1954 or 1955. Its translation, alas, instead of being presented with the original text, is scattered, piecemeal, throughout the diverse chapters of the book, so that only the most dedicated reader will likely go through the immensely time-consuming task of verifying it. This is all the more galling that, in many places, Barthel himself marks his own translation as doubtful (?). Evidence is drawn from other sources, sometimes without any translation at all (viz p.150, six verses, pp. 76 to 92: eighty-four verses without a single translation!), or with only partial translations (viz p.146, five verses, only two translated), or some in Spanish, without any English (viz p.196, fourteen verses with only a Spanish translation). Even the opening, p. vi, consisting of 10 verses (evaru kainga / etahi i ravaa...), is only accompanied by a German translation! Barthel's interpretations are thus, for all practical purposes, unverifiable by any but the most dedicated and knowledgeable reader with a great deal of time to spare. Or should I say waste? Indeed, in the last chapter, Barthel derives from Manuscript E the exact dates of Hotu Matua's migration to Easter Island: departure from Hiva on April 25, arrival at Rano Kau on June 10, arrival at Anakena on July 23, etc. Those dates are calculated as if there were a regular correspondence between the ancient Easter Island calendar and ours, valid year in, year out. But there can be no such correspondence, because the ancient Easter Island calendar was lunisolar (like the Jewish and ancient Greek ones), with twelve lunar months of 29 or 30 days, and a thirteenth embolismic month inserted about every third year to keep with the seasons. This book is valuable only insofar as it gives the full text of Manuscript E in transcription (a straight photographic reproduction would have been better). Barthel's one seminal, indispensable work - Grundlagen zur Entzifferung der Osterinselschrift - remains, alas, untranslated.
<< 1 >>
|