- MD & IJ
111: Were the early MoriOri of Melanesian origin?
We have suggested before that MoriOri, the pure MoriOri of which none are left, were strong in Melanesian roots. Some reports say this is incorrect, that they originated from Polynesian stock and only went to Rēkohu around 1500. Why then are their features so different to that of Maori? All old photos of pure blooded MoriOri show very different racial features, dress, styles, culture to than of the Polynesians we now call Maori. I'm sure there may have been some interracial breeding but dominant facial features, to us anyway, seem Melanesian. Even their tree art reveals a link to Melanesia. And keep in mind a team led by Janet Wilmshurst of Landcare Research received $830,000 from the Marsden Fund over three years to hunt for evidence to discover if Moriori settled the Chatham Islands around 1300 or 1500AD, yet there is not one recorded report of the result. Anyone know why? We suspect why?
Our theory has always been that MoriOri were once on the mainland and forced away by the warring Polynesians 800 years ago and that those here like the MoriOri (it is said there were three distinct races in small numbers) who didn't flee, were wiped out methodically. Old stories tell of thick lipped, fuzzy haired black people who were in the land when Polynesians arrived. But we can’t find anywhere were conclusive DNA testing reveals anything to either support or debunk this. So far it’s all suggestion, as is ours.
In 1894 Alexander Shand made notes of the features which resembled Maori but also had a strong Melanesian difference in some. These were his personal observations with a race not too much changed compared to now. He says that there appears to have been two distinct types - the straight-haired fairer people, and the curly-haired darker people, more approaching the Melanesian type. A lot of this is discussed in A. de Quatrefages description of Moriori skulls in his work 'Crania Ethnica'. An excerpt of this is below....
Twenty-eight of these skulls are in the anatomical museum of the University of Otago; seventeen are in the Canterbury Museum; five are in the Colonial Museum at Wellington. Though all fifty were, I believe, found at the Chathams, I do not regard them all as Moriori skulls. From what has been said above it is clear that Chatham Island skulls are not necessarily those of the Moriori aborigines. They may be so; but they may also be Maori, or even European; and in my collection it is easy to recognise different types of skull, and, though none of them are European, I have come to the conclusion that four skulls are Maori rather than Moriori. These differ from the others in several respects, but especially in the form of the cranial vault, and resemble more closely some of the skulls found in New Zealand, near the western opening of Cook Strait—that part of the North Island where the Ngatiawa and other invaders of 1835 lived before their voyage to the Chathams. The other forty-six skulls are, in my opinion, Moriori, but not all of one type. Amongst the adult skulls two types may be recognised, and the skulls may be divided into groups according to their resemblance to one or other—groups, however, which shade into each other through intermediate forms. The typical members of the first group are usually large and rather heavy skulls, with prominent parietal eminences and roof-like vertices. They are all more or less pentagonal as seen from behind, some very markedly so, and the low flattened retreating frontal region is a most striking feature. The excess of width over height is generally well marked; indeed, in the most typical members of the group the brain-case is distinctly flattened. The orbits are, as a rule, high, and the appearance of height is increased by the form of the superciliary ridges; while the nasal opening is narrow, with long prominent nasal bones, which are convex below. The air-sinuses in the frontal bone are mainly confined to the region above the root of the nose, so that, while there is, as a rule, a massive prominent glabella, the superciliary ridges are short, and do not pass far out over the orbits. The majority of the skulls from the Chatham Islands that I have examined are of this type. The skull numbered 27, shows a different type, and several others resemble it more or less. That there should be found among Moriori skulls some which might be regarded as Maori is almost to be expected, as there can be little doubt that both Maori and Moriori are the result of a mingling of the same races - in different proportions perhaps, but still the same. The opinion is that MoriOri as found by Europeans was a long blended mix of Polynesian and Melanesian. The skulls were distinctly different to Polynesian in that the anterior narrowing of the cranium is therefore more pronounced in the Moriori than in the Maori. The anterior nasal opening is therefore narrower in these Moriori skulls than in the Maoris that I have examined.
If it is true that they ventured to Rēkohu around 1500's as suggested, it would only be because of conflict they wanted to avoid as they were very passive compared to Polynesian Maori and it was at this time war for territory and defensive pa building began. If they had previously lived on the mainland, which is correct anyway, those early Polynesian arrivals before the migrations would have bred with those already present where stronger Melanesian roots were present. This would account for Melanesian features as Polynesians did not bring any Melanesians with them that can be proved. It is said that those they came here were high-caste families? Note that: No early burials such as at Waiau bar and other place regarded as first arrival locations has any trace of Melanesian DNA. If that doesn't seal it, nothing does.
But aside from the skull and facial features, what else was common to Melanesia?
1. Chevrons: Very common in Melanesia. There are many ancient artifact with chevrons that are not Polynesian but Melanesian designs
2. Fish: We have the only known fish design artifact and it's MoriOri. Melanesians use fish in their art often, but maori never did.
MoriOri Melanesia
3. Clubs: tooth edged shapes
Very strong evidence to Melanesian roots.
MoriOri Melanesian
3. Dendroglyphs: Similar to some carvings and tatu’s of Melanesia. Here is a photo of one and below that are drawings of others discovered on Rēkohu.
The dendroglyphs also have the strong rib features like the drawings above. These are also present on the Pouto Pou which also has spirals on it's shoulders which it what some Melanesians had. Maori never had shoulder tattoos. If you've seen that carving we talk of, you will know what we mean. Now here are some examples of ancient Melanesian carving styles along with an illustration of what was noted on the calf of a Solomon Islander in the early contact days.
The dendroglyphs also have the strong rib feature that is present on the Pouto Pou along with spirals on it's shoulders where Melanesians often had circular designs there.
That is four suggestive links to show that there is likely a very early Melanesian influence in Moriori. But regardless, Melanesians were likely here before any major Polynesian migration - there is just too much evidence to suggest anything else.
And regardless of all of that, what might be inside the cave we seek entrance to may open up the floodgates of investigation instead of the discussion being set aside and artifacts being hidden away or explained away as creative attempts of the early Maori. It could be, but there are so many reasons why it wouldn't be likely back before 1500.
A lot of the comparison still surviving, aside from artifacts, are the tattoos of Melanesia although MoriOri have similar design in art they never applied the moko. There will be a religious reason for that we imagine.
Addendum: It has been brought to my attention that Dendroglyphs (tree carvings) are also an Aboriginal feature in some areas of the the far north of Australia...you know - the part close the Melanesia! No dendroglyphs exist in the Polynesian Pacific as far as we know. This fact only further supports our theory.
