Time and place
French Polynesia
A regional architectural synthesis dates change in major megalithic forms around 1600–1765 CE. This is not the beginning or end of Māʻohi relationships or ritual activity.
Connected worlds · Living heritage · French Polynesia
Taputapuātea: a place of relationships
c. 1600–1765 CE (regional monumental-phase model)
How can a place hold relationships across an ocean?
The marae complex at Taputapuātea on Raʻiātea has political, ceremonial and funerary functions in a continuing cultural landscape. The case follows this place within Māʻohi worlds, without treating one interval as the date of all Pacific migrations.
Research draft · the main interpretation still needs independent reviewPage published · Source packet updated
At a glance
- Place
- French Polynesia
- Dates · case focus
- c. 1600–1765 CE (regional monumental-phase model)A regional architectural synthesis dates change in major megalithic forms around 1600–1765 CE. This is not the beginning or end of Māʻohi relationships or ritual activity.
- The question
- How can a place hold relationships across an ocean?
- Key finding
- Taputapuātea on Raʻiātea includes a marae complex with political, ceremonial and funerary functions in a continuing cultural landscape. Read the evidence ↓
- Important limit
- An approximate heritage interval does not date all Austronesian migrations. Public descriptions do not authorize disclosure of restricted knowledge.
Where this case belongs
French Polynesia · c. 1600–1765 CE (regional monumental-phase model)
These points locate named sites or parts of a listed property. They show geographic references, not ancient borders or excavation plans. They make no claim about present-day sovereignty.
● Published reference point. Natural Earth public-domain land outline. No political boundaries are shown. The map does not capture scrolling.
Locations, precision and sources (1)
- Taputapuātea
Published heritage-property reference point; not an excavation coordinate or ancient boundary. Present-day geographic reference for the named site/component; does not date an occupation or establish a territory.
-16.8414°, -151.3724° · Coordinate source ↗
Source passage and date
S16 50 29.04 W151 22 20.56
Coordinate source checked 2026-10-27.
What this case covers
What was found
Taputapuātea on Raʻiātea includes a marae complex with political, ceremonial and funerary functions in a continuing cultural landscape.
What it may tell us
Published architectural comparisons can be studied without assuming they disclose the full meaning or restricted knowledge of a living place.
Alternative explanations and limits
An approximate heritage interval does not date all Austronesian migrations. Public descriptions do not authorize disclosure of restricted knowledge.
Access and review notes
The architectural analysis synthesizes earlier data; it does not independently confirm every heritage claim. A separate coral-stone article was inaccessible and supplied no added facts. Custodial applicability remains open.
Read the evidence
Source links apply to specific claims. Several links can lead back to the same study. Read what each source supports.
Taputapuātea on Raʻiātea includes a marae complex with political, ceremonial and funerary functions in a continuing cultural landscape.
What remains uncertain
An approximate heritage interval does not date all Austronesian migrations. Public descriptions do not authorize disclosure of restricted knowledge.
Method and source passage
Institutional primary description; introductory synthesis
Description and statement of Outstanding Universal Value
The study places rapid change in major Society Islands megalithic structures around 1600–1765 CE, identifying Taputapuātea as a major example.
What remains uncertain
Regional architectural chronology does not date all ritual activity or establish a founding year for the living sacred landscape.
Method and source passage
Primary research/institutional source, bounded finding
Late monumental phase, paragraph before Figure 6
Questions that remain
- How can a place hold relationships across an ocean?
- Which independent evidence would refine or challenge this account?
Living heritage
Published architectural comparisons can be studied without assuming they disclose the full meaning or restricted knowledge of a living place.
Limit: An approximate heritage interval does not date all Austronesian migrations. Public descriptions do not authorize disclosure of restricted knowledge.
UNESCO World Heritage Centre: Taputapuātea ↓Architecture and chronology
A monument can have a later building history within a much older landscape of relationships and ritual activity.
Limit: Local legends and archaeological date models are different evidence classes.
Wallin & Martinsson-Wallin (2025), From ritual spaces to monumental expressions ↓Sources you can inspect
UNESCO World Heritage Centre: Taputapuātea ↗
Taputapuātea on Raʻiātea includes a marae complex with political, ceremonial and funerary functions in a continuing cultural landscape.
- Passage or section
- Description and statement of Outstanding Universal Value
Access and source overlap
Institutional primary web account inspected 27 October 2026; no fieldwork or independent peer review claimed
Several links may describe the same research. Shared authors or data can limit how much independent confirmation they provide.
Wallin & Martinsson-Wallin (2025), From ritual spaces to monumental expressions ↗
Architectural change and a regional chronological model distinguish later monuments from earlier ritual activity.
- Passage or section
- Late monumental phase; Discussion: geochronological model; Figure 6
Access and source overlap
Primary research synthesis full-text Methods, late monumental phase and Discussion inspected
Several links may describe the same research. Shared authors or data can limit how much independent confirmation they provide.