13: Origins

Where did the Tangata Whenua come from, and where did the Maori who came later arrive from. Most say Hawaiki which if you think of the name, sounds very much like Hawaii. There must be something in that, after all, their wooden carved 'tiki' are very similar to what the Maori carved, except Maori called them Pou. In the very early days, wooden (tiki/pou) lined the coast, and a few did survive. But Maori didn't line the coast with pou. It is interesting that those from Rapanui had no such word - but they did have stone varieties called Moai. There is a Waitaha Pou in the Dargaville Museum (see below). Discovered in 1991 the 2.7m carving is unlike any other Pou ever discovered. No other Maori carving I have ever seen has specific ribs rather than decorative patterns. Yes - it is obvious that the origins of the early peoples were from a different location. Some have said the Dargaville Pou simply represents an early development of Maori carving. That is a plausible explanation and may even be true, but this particular carving is unlike any other 'Maori' carving found. You would think you would find real evidence of style transition somewhere, but there isn't any. Therefore there are two reasonable conclusions: 1. An improbable theory of style progression 2. The carving is of the existing inhabitants of NZ when Maori arrived - living isolated in these islands for at least 500-800 years before Maori arrived.

Facial features: If you look at early photos of Maori there were many with Polynesian features, and many with Melanesian features. They were quite distinct initially and hair, skull and nose shape all bore this out. And this also depended on what part of NZ you lived in. Settlements of individual immigration from different locations – all gradually interbreeding and assimilating into a new culture. So Maori did not come from just one place. There never was a great migration fleet – they came from various places at different times.

Apparently, a few pounamu (greenstone) items have been found in Melanesia which would put the discovery of Pounamu in Aotearoa at a time long before the canoe migrations. This could also confirm the coming and going of various legendary figures from and to their homelands in the Pacific, notably Melanesia. It is also noted that no stone manufacturing areas were found in the North Island, they were all in the south (at least in 1897 which is when the article was written).

Maybe they were following the rumours and the migration from the mid-pacific to NZ was no different to many European countries sending ships south to seek out new lands.

While art, culture, weapons, tools and even methods of burial are different all around the Pacific, the languages of Pacific have more similarities as recorded by the earliest European explorers. And understand this...when Europeans arrived, not only were the looks and stature of southern Maori different to those in the north, the language was slightly different as well. Many words were closer to Tahitian.

But regardless of Maori arrivals, where did the previous inhabitants come from? One tradition is that of the Irihia or Uru. The tradition was that the canoes that left that land had sun-dried kumara among their provisions at a time when the sweet potato had not crossed the pacific from South America. This would mean some came from Peru or Easter Island. Regardless of the speculation, no one can be sure without DNA testing.

Here is a comparison of languages around the pacific...Even among the Hawaiian Islands; language was slightly different from island to island (as it was in NZ). But note the Rapanui language (Easter Island) is very close to Maori considering the remote location of both islands and the fact Rapanui people were supposed to come from Melanesia and had no contact with Maori. However these three languages are very close - too close really.

Here is a Youtube video of great interest. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2z6PlYiQSTs I too believe the origins of these Urukehu or Ngati Hotu to have come from Easter Island via Peru. This video says that DNA can prove it, yet there has been no DNA report produced for us to read as evidence. If a DNA test did in fact prove it the origins, I'd like the evidence. Where is it?

However, if actual ancient skeletons buried in NZ right now, could prove different origins with different height and hair, all with DNA results published and carbon dating documents evidenced and there for all to see...this will assist those looking to bring these people back into the light. Now, whether you believe any of this is irrelevant. But it is worth listening to, considering and asking a few questions at least.

Waitaha Pou in the Dargaville Museum