166: Is Te Uenuku really 'unique'?
The Tainui iwi share a common ancestry from Polynesian migrants who arrived in New Zealand on the Tainui waka, which voyaged across the Pacific Ocean from Hawaiki to Aotearoa (North Island) approximately 800 years ago. According to Pei Te Hurinui Jones, the Tainui historian, Tainui first entered the Waikato about 1400 bringing with them kumara plants. By about 1450 they had conquered the last of the indigenous people of the Waikato region in a battle at Atiamuri.
So, even by their own legends, Tainui; along with other Polynesian immigrants at that time, came to a land already occupied and took the land off the indigenous people. Sort of ironic really. Maori now complain Europeans took their land (when most of it was traded). But while those true injustices are valid under the treaty (they are lucky there was one for the French would not have been so kind), if utu was a spiritual matter and not just one of anger, it would seem some karma has been dealt out for them suffering exactly what they did to others. But that doesn't change the current situation does it? Nor the fact Maori refuse to openly acknowledge they took lands off those already here, and countless battles and massacres already recorded in their lore, prove that. Some honesty would be really good around now... That aside, the wrongs done to Maori; who did wrongs to others, is not the topic of this post.
This is the story of a pou. But not just an ordinary ornate pou such as sit in many museums that are 17th century designs, but an ancient stylized pou. This is about Te Uenuku. Most of you will be familiar with it for we have done a couple of posts on this unique pou already. Read these below and learn what we learned from 2016 and 2017, until now. Just as an aside, why would those living in the pacific islands let a fleeing band of 40-80 people take away the most sacred thing on that island? We will let others debate that. But the pou is 'officially' said to be carved around AD1400... because, well, anything much older would predate Maori. Or did they copy a design already seen in the area... once used by the indigenous people, the true tangata whenua?
Te Uenuku is regarded as a unique pou as there is none else like it. The Te Awamutu Museum says there are supposed to be smaller examples hidden in the Pirongia Forest but they are likely far off the known tracks and on the south or east side, close to Tiwarawara ( the forgotten) or Kohatupiko (a place of yearning respect), if they exist at all. I think they do, you will see why soon. But we will forget those as they would be almost impossible to find, if not covered over in moss and unrecognisable, toppled, or rotted out by now.
Te Uenuku is said to be close to a type of statue found in Hawaii as per the example below. It certainly suggest the carvers had some ancient combined knowledge or tradition/lore from which to work with. But no one is known to have travelled from Hawaii to Otahiti and then on to Aotearoa (new name) to repeat the design. In New Guinea (Melanesia) there is a tribe who use what they call a Heratu, which is an ancestor totem or tapu post. Some of them had four spikes protruding from the top of the head. Others looked like crude examples of Maori pou. The Orokaiva taught their children the secrets of the sacred flute (think Patupaiarehe). Where did it come from? We will never know. But is Te Uenuku unique; one of a kind, as Tainui says it is?
Well... it seems knowledge of such pou is known and either forgotten, ignored, or suppressed... but not well enough. For we have found photos of another three taken in the last century. Were they copies, or a form already in existence long before the Polynesian immigrants arrived? We do not know, but even the Te Awamutu Museum says there are supposed to be smaller examples in the Pirongia Forest as discussed above. The first photo below shows one standing with the photo taken from the rear as you approach from the stream access side of the area. The second are close up photos at a site to the left of the first one.
These photos are shocking and unmistakable evidence that the pou in the Te Awamutu museum is not, and never was, unique. Te Uenuku is old we believe, official sources say AD1400 because this is supposed to be the exact pou carved from totara when not long after Tainui arrived to house Uenuku, the legendary sacred, and now lost, stone. They could be less aged but as nothing exists anywhere in the world (apart from similarities in Hawaii). The design could be pre-fleet Maori and existing in NZ before the immigrants arrived. But that cannot be proved as most have rotted away, yet one remains because it was preserved in the swamp; such is the propensity of hiding sacred items when attacked. It is likely others would be found by accident in the future or by GPR methods. The latter would be more likely and excavation around sacred sites and swamps is now prohibited.
If we examine godsticks of around 16-1700’s we find many with fixed hoods protruding over the face. These smaller god sticks were often used as a temporary shrine for an atua by a tohunga ahurewa. Tohunga were often responsible for healing people, and sometimes used god sticks to concentrate the power of a particular deity. The function of god sticks is to act as containers for the divinities to enter during rituals. That seems to stack up with Te Uenuku as it was a container for Uenuku... (in effect Te Uenuku is not actually Uenuku at all, but a container for it, therefore this pou is incorrectly named).
It would take much time and effort to make something the size of the Ngaroto pou (Te Uenuku), so it is likely the godsticks were a more modern and simpler style, with faces carved into them as per below, instead of the main original form.
Yet, it seems these Te Uenuku style tall pou were not to hold deities at all, but were burial markers. Those in the two photos above, when first seen by a European, had also been damaged by fire. This in itself is an important point. If you haven't already read the post numbered no.2 above... read it now.
All different to fleet Maori design... all burned
The old pou shown above in the black and white photos above are not to hold atua, but are burial markers for Tutanekai Taniwha and others. He was a poriro (bastard). He had a large koru on his right cheek with none on his left. An example of this was seen at the pukeroa gateway in the 1800s. I'm not sure where that carving is now. Being the son of Tuwharetoa he became an Ariki despite the manner of his birth. The posts are the taniwha of ariki descent. The set you see had been replaced but still put up long before the Pakeha came; according to Te Hapi Tamehana.
The place they once stood is called Te Tupapara O Te Koroiti Ko Tama on the west shore of Taupo. And here it is in colour.... Weren't expecting that were you...?
Two more posts are known to have existed and they also had names. They were Makatotorangi, who stood somewhere in the Hawkes Bay, and Te Arikinuipoihi which stood in a secret place in the King Country; Ngati Maniapoto territory.
The use of these wooden posts (likely Totara) is to mark the status and importance of descent through the tuakana lines of Tainui. It is said the spikes and design convey genealogical information but that is erroneous as they all have either three or four spikes. Ah ha, but what about the notches on the chest area of Te Uenuku I hear some of you say. Exactly, the finer details give clue to those knowledgeable to read them.
Maybe we'll have more to offer in the future on these style of buria pou... and why they ALL showed signs of burning... To me, that is the more important point as to who made them and what they represent. I know one story is that the pa where Te Uenuku was found, was once burned. But no, there is more to it than that as we have alluded to in years past. You don't see other Maori carvings burned, only the ones that don't fit the expected Polynesian design or narrative...
Comments