Hawaiki: The Original Home of the Maori

Front matter

HAWAIKI:

THE ORIGINAL HOME OF THE MAORI;

WITH A SKETCH OF POLYNESIAN HISTORY.

Chapter 1

.

CHAPTER I.

THE POLYNESIAN RACE AND ITS TRADITIONS.

The question of the origin of the Maori people of New Zealand necessarily involves that of the whole Polynesian Race, for the Maoris are but one of a number of branches of that race, although the most important in point of numbers and in a few other respects, which we shall have occasion to refer to in the course of this narrative. The homogeneity of this race is a remarkable feature, scattered as it is over an extent of the earth's surface that equals in actual area—if it does not exceed that occupied—by any other race of like homogeneity. The area occupied by the race in the Pacific may be stated as about two million square miles; but the land area within this space is small, and varies from that of New Zealand with its one hundred thousand square miles, down to little atolls of barely a square mile in area. The number of the inhabitants of this vast space is by no means proportionate to its size. The following table will illustrate this, the figures being approximate:—

New Zealand Maoris and half-castes | |43,143

Hawaii—natives and half-whites | |39,504

Samoa | |38,000

Tahiti and French Oceania | |25,000

Tonga Groups | |18,000

Rarotonga and adjacent groups | |8,000

Niue | |4,576

All other groups | |5,000

|181,223

The figures above exclude the population of all islands where the people are more or less strongly mixed with neighbouring races, such as the Micronesian, Melanesian and Papuan, and the half-caste Fijians.

At the end of the eighteenth century, estimates were made by Cook, Forster, and others, and the totals were 1,290,000 people inhabiting the same groups. On comparing these figures, the question arises: Have our efforts at civilizing this race been the blessing that we claim for it? Aua hoki!

From Nukuoro island in the far N.W. to Easter Island (Rapa-nui) in the distant S E.; from Hawaii in the extreme N.E. to New Zealand (Aotea-roa) in the S.W., we find one people, speaking dialects of one language, having practically the same customs and beliefs, and bearing so great an affinity in physique, colour, and general appearance, that it is difficult to distinguish the inhabitants of one part from those of any other. And yet, to the close observer, there are differences distinguishable here and there, especially where the environment differs much. For instance, the Moriori people of the Chatham Islands, in the extreme S.W. part of the Polynesian area, present some differences in physique from the Tahitians, who are, as a rule, taller, fairer, and better looking. In their happy isle, nature provides for most of their wants with very little aid from themselves: the breadfruit, coconut, and

Women of Tahiti, Polynesian type.

banana grow and produce abundantly—almost spontaneously,—whilst fish is abundant and good. The heat of the sun is tempered by the perpetual shade in which the people live, making them fairer than the average members of the race. The Morioris, on the other hand, lived a hard strenuous life, without any vegetable food beyond fern root and a few indifferent fruits, whilst their island is more open to the sun. The products of the sea were their principal articles of diet, and to secure this they led a wandering life, camping for a time

A Moriori of the Chatham Isles, Polynesian type.

wherever food was most plentiful, and in their daily lives frequently exposed to boisterous weather. The exposed positions from which they obtained their food, the cliffs and rocks of the sea-shore, ever subject to strong saline winds, made the people weather-beaten and darker than the race generally. Sad to say, we must speak of the Moriori in the past time, for there are not more than a dozen of the pure blood left out of the approximate number of 2,000 at the time their islands were conquered by the Maori of New Zealand in 1835–6.

A Maori girl, Polynesian type.

Whilst the Polynesian race is thus homogeneous, there can be traced amongst them differences which are not due entirely to environment, though the latter has served to emphasize the divergence from the common type. These variations from the type show that the race, as we know it, is not pure; that it has been crossed by other races in the remote past. The fact that the variations in type

A Samoan, Polynesian type.

are found amongst all branches of the race, denotes that the crossings with other races took place in remote antiquity. It is somewhat difficult at this time to say what the original type of the true Polynesian was; but it is probable that the handsome, tall, oval-faced, high browed, lithe, active, light brown, black straight-haired, black or very dark-brown-eyed, cheerful, dignified individual so frequently met with, is the nearest to the true original Polynesian. This type predominates in some branches more than others, and perhaps Samoa contains a larger proportion of this character than any other island, but it is found everywhere—from Hawaii to New Zealand, from Samoa to Easter Island.

A Samoan, Polynesian type.

It is probable that nowhere is the true Polynesian type still in existence. When we come to consider their history, we shall see that the race has been acted on by ethnic elements of many and diverse characters, which show in the people as we know them. It could not be otherwise, looking to the migrations of the race, and the various peoples they must have had more or less communication with in their long progress eastwards from the Fatherland. On their way to the East they must at one time have been in frequent contact with the Papuan or Negritto race of Indonesia, and subsequently with the less strongly marked Negritto people of the Melanesian Islands, besides, as we shall indicate, with some white race, all of which have left their marks on the people, in their physique, their customs and their traditions.

It is unfortunate that up to the present time, no comprehensive study of the craniology of the Polynesian race as a whole has been made. What has been done in this respect—a mere nibbling at the edges, as it were—bears out the mixed Papuan and Melanesian character of the Polynesians. But to satisfy science as to the origin of the people, something much more systematic is required.

Failing the more exact craniological data, we have to fall back on philology, manners and customs, physical appearances and traditions of the race, to determine their origin. In what follows we shall touch on these various aspects from time to time, but this account is mainly derived from the reasonable interpretation that may be placed on the traditions of the race—others more competent can deal with the question from the other aspects. And here, I would like to say, that in my humble opinion the European Ethnologist is frequently

A Soloman Islander, Melanesian type

too apt to discredit tradition. It is an axiom that all tradition is based on fact—whilst the details may be wrong, the main stem is generally right. In this, local colouring is one of the chief things to guard against, and here the European Ethnologist is generally at fault for want of local knowledge—at any rate when he deals with Polynesian traditions. No one who has for many years been in the habit of collecting traditions from the natives themselves, in their own language, and as given by word of mouth, or written by themselves, can doubt the general authenticity of the matters communicated. But it is necessary to go to the right source to obtain reliable information, and even then, the collector must understand what he is about or he will fail.

The men who really know the traditions of their race, look upon them as treasures which are not to be communicated to everybody. They will not impart their knowledge except to those whom they know and respect, and then very frequently only under the condition that no use is to be made of them until the reciter has passed away. Much of the old history of the Polyiiesians was looked on as tapu (sacred) and its communication to those who could not share this feeling, or who would make improper use of it, would inevitably—in the belief of the old tohungas (priests)—bring down disaster on the heads of the reciters. It is never safe to question any statement made by the narrator, though of course any point not clear can be elucidated by questions. But never show any doubt of what is being told; worse than all never ridicule the most extravagant statements—(these can always be sifted afterward, and the residue of truth retained)—to do so, at once causes the narrator to draw in, and the opportunity is lost for ever.

It has always been the special function of the priesthood, from the very earliest dates in Polynesian history, to keep the verbal record of the history and literature of the race, and as the office of priest (tohunga, tahuna, tahua, kahuna, etc.) was, in most branches of the race, hereditary, it was the duty of the father, and very often the grandfather, to educate their offspring in the tribal lore. This teaching was accompanied with many ceremonies, and karakias, or incantations, invocations, etc., in order to impress the pupil with the importance of the matter taught, and as was thought, to impress it indelibly upon his mind. There was a special sanctity attached to many things taught; deviation from the accepted doctrines, or history, was supposed to bring on the offender the wrath of the gods who were ever present, watching to catch the people tripping. It is obvious from this, that traditions acquire a value they would otherwise not possess. The fear of the consequences arising out of false teaching acted as an ever present check on the imagination. There are many known instances where serious troubles have arisen through deviation from accepted teaching—due generally to separation of the people in islands or places without frequent communication. As an illustration of this may be mentioned the series of deaths, wars, migrations, etc., that took place in the time of a noted ancestor of Maoris, Rarotongans, and Tahitians, named Whiro, who flourished about the eleventh century, which incident is known as the schemes of Te Aotea and Te Aouri in Tahitian history, and is also known to Maori tradition in connection with Wharekura in the history of Whiro.

Notwithstanding the care with which traditions were kept, it is only natural that innovations gradually crept into what was at one time the common property of the race. Doubtless many of the traditions still recited are of immense age. With division of the people into tribes (which there are reasons for thinking is a very ancient institution), migrations to different parts, and the final separation of some branches from the other, innovations and local coloring have gradually been introduced. But taken as a whole, and after making due allowance for the lapse of time, environment, change of language, etc., it will be found that the accordance of traditions collected from different branches of the race is remarkable.

It is difficult for a civilized people which habitually uses writing in recording events, to conceive of the powers of memory possessed by people who have nothing but the memory to trust to. Some few instances of this may be mentioned: A Maori and his wife dictated to Mr. Elsdon Best, over 400 songs, and could generally tell the names of the composers and the incidents alluded to in them. Another Maori of mature age dictated to the writer 164 songs, etc.—and these were so impressed on his memory, that the quotation of one line was sufficient to recall the whole of the song at once. Another Maori wrote for thePolynesian Society 110 songs, and doubtless he knows many more, but the effort of writing wearied him. Again, another Maori has written 11 volumes of M.S. treating of the traditions, songs, customs, etc., of the Maori, and this, at a very advanced age, all of this matter having been retained in his mind, and including hundreds of proper names. Two years ago the writer took down from the recital of an old Maori the genealogical descent of all the members of his tribe, involving the recollection of over 700 names, and going back for 34 generations. Each branch was followed out to the present day, and in most cases the reciter could supply the names of the husband or wife who did not come into the line of descent, and also say what tribe they came from and give something of their history. Efforts of memory of this character are impossible with us, and are not known of, or not considered by the generality of writers on traditions, which are hence set aside for the fanciful creations of their own brains, after the manner of the German philosopher who was able to evolve the idea of a camel out of his inner consciousness!

I have thought it necessary to say this much on the subject of traditions, for it will be mainly on them, and the inferences that may be drawn from them, that the principal reliance is placed in seeking the origin of the Maoris in the following narrative.

Chapter 2

CHAPTER II.

GENEALOGICAL CONNECTIONS AND CHRONOLOGY.

And moreover, unless we can fix some approximate date to the various legends, they are of little value in this particular connection—they serve to show the ideology and beliefs of the race, but without dates they cannot form history. We are met at the outset with this difficulty: that the Polynesian has no idea of time in our sense of the word. All he can say with respect to any event is, that it occurred in so-and-so's time, and that it was after or before some other event. But luckily we have an approximate means of fixing dates in Polynesian History through the genealogical tables. It is probable that no race has more highly valued their pedigrees, or possessed so many—it was considered to be an essential part of the education of everyone having any pretentions to chiefdom to be able to recite his pedigree for at least 20 generations, and to know the family alliances to remote degrees. The notion of kinship was carried to degrees of relationship very distant, according to our ideas, and it is quite common to hear one person referring to another as his elder or younger brother or sister, who is, according to our ideas only an eighth or a tenth cousin. In former times the genealogies were considered to be sacred and were used for what may be called religious purposes. Amongst some branches of the Maoris they were recited at marriages, at the naming of a child, and in cases of difficult birth, always accompanied by Karakias or invocations. The old songs often contain genealogies, as did the Karakias. A good example of a very lengthy genealogy embodied in a formal song or recitation is to be found in the "Song of Kualii" of Hawaii.

It is upon the genealogies we must rely for dates in the history of the race; and the first thing to determine in connection with them is the number of years to be assumed as the average length of a generation. Fornander in his "Polynesian Race," has adopted the European standard of 30 years; but the consensus of opinion of several Polynesian scholars who know the race well, is that 25 years is nearer the truth, for the Polynesians married early, and many women come into the genealogies, who as a rule, marry very early. It is this latter number, therefore, that will be adopted in fixing dates in what follows.

As a rule the Polynesian genealogies are reliable within certain limits and go very far back. I cannot at all agree with Mr. Basil Thompson that they "do not carry us back for more than seven or eight generations, and beyond this limit we are apt to step into the regions of mythology." This is a very surprising statement to emanate from one who has passed some years amongst various branches of the race, i.e., Tongans, and the half-caste Polynesians of Fiji. To those who have studied this question amongst various branches of the race, no proof is necessary as to the general accuracy—always within certain limits—of Polynesian genealogies; but as Mr. Thompson has—very rightly—acquired a good deal of fame by his writings, it is necessary to show that his estimate of the value of these genealogies is mistaken. At the same time, for the purpose I have in hand, some evidence is also requisite, in order to judge of the degree of reliability that may be placed on the dates to be used herein. First may be mentioned, that the great migration to New Zealand took place at 21–22 generations back from the year 1900, or in the year 1350. This date is arrived at by taking the mean number contained in over 50 genealogical tables going back to those who came here in the fleet, all of which will agree to within 4 or 5 generations in number. Where many women come into the lines, they are naturally longer.

But the severest proofs that can be applied to these tables, is to compare those from different branches of the race showing descent from the same ancestor. The first attempt to apply this method will be found in Vol. II. of the "Journal of the Polynesian Society," where the question is fully dealt with. Here it will be only necessary to quote results. Maoris, Rarotongans, Tahitians, and Hawaiians had many ancestors in common. Amongst them were persons named Whiro, Hiro, Iro (according to the dialect) and Hua. The descent from these two persons is preserved by each branch of the race named, who moreover have had no communication with one another from a few years after the period of these two men until last century. Now the results of comparing the genealogical tables from each branch down to 1850, are as follow:—

Hawaii (from Hua) | 23 | generations.

Raiatea (Tahiti) (from Hiro or Whiro) | 21

Rarotonga (from Iro or Whiro) | 24

New Zealand (from Whiro and Hua) | 24

This conformity of record from four different sources shows that a considerable amount of agreement is to be found in the genealogical tables as preserved by different branches of the race, and clearly demonstrates their common ancestry. From the above figures we may—by allowing twenty-five years to a generation—arrive at an approximate date in Polynesian History, which can be utilized as a basis for others. We may therefore say that Whiro and his brother Hua flourished A.D. 1250 to 1275, and as will be seen later on, this is a very important date in the history of the race—it is during this period that Tangiia, the great ancestor of the Raro-tongans, flourished, and about 100 years afterwards the fleet left those parts to settle in Ncav Zealand.

It must now be shown how the principal lines of ancestry of the Polynesians join, and the agreement, or otherwise, must be pointed out.

|Tahitian Line.

|40 | Ta'aroa-manahune Manu-tu-nu'u Te Ra'au-'a'ana Te Moana-rau Te Fa'a-nu'u

|Hawaii Line. | Maori Line. | Rarotonga Lines. | |35 | Te Ra'i-mavete Nu'u To Momo'a Tafeta

|30 | Ruatea, Koropanga-ki-aua (brothers) Ono kura Nga-upoko-turua Nga-maru | |30 | 'Oropa'a-nui-tauara'a Tu-Oropa'a-nuia Hia Mara'a

|26 | Kotuku-tea (ct.) Kaukura | |26 | Tu-'Oropa'a-maeha'a

|24 & 26 'Olopana = Lu'ukia | |25 | Tu-te-Koropanga = Rukutia Anu (also Moe-tara-uri) | Moe-metua Moe-tara-uri = Akiamano (f) | Kaungaki

|23–24 | Whiro (the same as) | Iro (ct. of Taungiia and Motoro) | 24 | Taungiia Motoro Uneuku-rakeiora Uneuku-te-aitu

20 | Ruatapu (by Maori and Rarotongan lines)

Note.—ct. means contemporary. The figures show generations from the present time.

I have added one generation to the Tahitian line, as the Table was collected in the first quarter of the 19th century to bring it into accordance with the other lines.

Amongst the notable Hawaiian chiefs who, about the years 1100 to 1200, were constantly passing from the Northern Group to Tahiti and the neighbouring islands, was one named 'Olopana, whose wife was Lu'ukia. 'Olopana lived in the beautiful valley of Waipi'o on the eastern shores of Hawaii. During some heavy floods, the cultivations in the valley were destroyed, which determined 'Olopana to seek a new home in the Southern Isles. He settled at Kahiki (Tahiti), at a place named Moa-ula-nui-akea, which Miss Henry identifies with Mou'a-ura-nui-atea,

Tu-te-Koropanga's home.

or the Tahitian mountain now called Tahara'a. 'Olopana's residence in Tahiti would bring him into touch with the ancestors of the Maoris, if my theory referred to later on is good that they were at that time living in that island. It is probable, therefore, that the name of 'Olopana is to be found in Maori history. Now, 'Olopana's and his wife's names, if converted into Maori by known letter changes, would be Koropanga and Rukutia. As a matter of fact, we do find in Maori history the names of Tu-te-Koropanga, whose wife was Rukutia, and that they lived in Hawaiki, which, as will be pointed out, includes Tahiti and the adjacent groups. The Ngai-Tahu tribe of South New Zealand have some long stories about these people, and I ascertained from Tare Wetere te Kahu, a very well informed man of that tribe, that Tu-te-Koropanga was the ancestor of the Waitaha people of the South Island, a tribe that has long been extinct, and whose ancestors were said by my informant to have come to New Zealand in the Matiti canoe, before the fleet. This information was confirmed by Paora Taki, an old and learned man, formerly of Kaiapohia, but now dead. On first seeing these names in Fornander eleven years ago, their probable identity with the Maori ancestors had struck me, but it was not until after five or six years of worrying my correspondents, all over New Zealand and the Pacific, that I finally obtained from the two old men named, the connection of these people with known lines of descent to the present day. Miss Henry has also furnished the probable connection with Tahitian lines, which is shown on the previous page.

With respect to the above table, 'Olopana and his wife Lu'ukia, lived either twenty-four or twenty-six generations ago, according to which of the Hawaiian lines is taken. That these people are identical with Tu-te-Koropanga and his wife Rukutia of Maori history must be taken as almost certain, for it is extremely improbable that two men of the same name should marry wives of the same name—and their period is the same. Moreover, both from Hawaiian and Maori story, Rukutia appears to have been a woman of advanced ideas. With the former people she is accredited with having invented the female dress called pau, which the Hawaiians "make to this day, for no other reason than because the pau of Lu'ukia was of five thicknesses." In Maori history her name occurs in an ancient karakia used in tatooing the women, wherein the operator says, "Be you tatooed after the likeness of Rukutia." In another song it is said, "Gird thee with the dress (mat) of Rukutia"—perhaps a reference to the Hawaiian story. Again she is referred to as a poetess. That she was distinguished as a danseuse, the long story of the troubles between her and her first husband, Tama, will show.

According to my Maori informants, Tu-te-Koropanga's daughter was Anu-matao, and she was a matua to Whiro, which may mean an aunt as well as a mother. The other Maori accounts state that Whiro was the son of Moe-tarauri, as do the Rarotongan histories, which latter give his mother's name as Akimano, and this is confirmed by Tahitian history, where Hiro's mother is shown to be a Fa'imano, a name which is identical with Akimano. The name in Maori would be Whakimano.

Whether Tu-te-Koropanga is identical with Tu-'Oropa'a-maeha'a (in Maori letters, Tu-Koropanga-mahanga) of the Tahitian line, there is more uncertainty; but they are shown to have flourished within the same, or the next, generation, and they both lived in Hawaiki by Maori account, in Tahiti by the Tahitian account—places which will be shown to be identical. The Hawaiian 'Olopana was of Southern extraction, though his father lived in Oahu. His grandfather Maweke was one of those Hawaiian chiefs who voyaged backwards and forwards from Hawaii to Tahiti.

We may possibly see another connection between Hawaiian and Maori ancestors of about this period in the name Pau-matua (Paumakua in Hawaiian). According to the genealogies published by Fornander, there were two very noted ancestors of this name whom he shows on different lines to have lived in the same generation, and a mean of six lines from their period down to the present shows that they flourished twenty-five generations ago. One of these men was a noted voyager, who had visited Kahiki (all the world outside Hawaii, but probably here intended for Tahiti and its neighbouring islands), and the other is said to have come from Tahiti and settled in Hawaii. But both appear to have been descendants of people whose ancestors formerly lived in the southern groups. In visiting Tahiti and the neighbouring islands, Pau-makua must, if my theory is right, have come across the ancestors of the Maori. We find that one of the ancestors of Turi, of the Aotea canoe, was named Pau-matua, and—taking Turi to have lived twenty generations ago, or in 1350—that this Pau-matua flourished by one, twenty-three, or by other two accounts, twenty-four generations ago, or very nearly at the same date as the Hawaiian chief. According to Hawaiian history Pau-matua's son was Moena-i-mua (in Maori, Moenga-i-mua) and by Maori history it was Puha-i-mua. These two names are not exactly proof that the Hawaiian and Maori ancestors Pau-matua are the same, but there is a strong probability that they were the same individual.

A constant difficulty met with in the names of Polynesian people is, that they had several, or often changed them from the occurrence of a death or other circumstance. Hence the same ancestor is often known under different names by separate branches of the race, or even by different tribes of the same branch. It was an ancient custom amongst the Polynesians that chiefs visiting strange islands should take a wife from the people of such islands. It was often the case, also, that these wives and their children remained with their own tribe. So that we have lines of people in different islands, descending from one ancestor, who are not known to the records of other islands by the same name.

Taken altogether, we see that these genealogical lines, from New Zealand, Tahiti, Rarotonga, Hawaii, all tend to prove one another, and that we may deduce from them a fairly accurate date for the period of Tangiia, viz.: the year 1250, which will agree with the period of Whiro; and these two men were contemporaries, as we shall see later on.

In order to show the data relied on for dates, a reference must now be made to the large general table of Rarotonga ancestors at the end of this book, for on it depends the dates of events in Rarotongan and Polynesian history as herein deduced. That table, starting from the earliest traditionary period when the people lived in Atia-te-varinga-nui, comes down to the time of the occupation of Rarotonga in 1250. We are now getting into the "misty past" and cannot expect such agreement in the lines as has been shown in those of later epochs, and of which other examples might be adduced.

We must first consider the agreement or otherwise of the two long lines shown in the table with one another and with a third to be found in vol. iv. of the "Journal of the Polynesian Society," page 129. The latter was conmumicated to the late Rev. J. B. Stair, in 1842, by Matatia, of Rarotonga, and should therefore have a considerable value attached to it, considering its date. All these three lines commence at the same ancestor, Te Nga-taito-ariki, and come down to Tangiia, or to his contemporary, Iro (or Whiro, of Maori history). I shall have to point out directly that the Iro and Tangiia lines differ in places as to the order of names, and they also differ in the names themselves, so much so that they must be different lines of descent, not two editions of the same. It is within my own experience that a group of names is sometimes misplaced on a genealogy, though the total number may be correct, and this is what I think has occurred on the Iro line.

If we count the generations between Te Nga-taito-ariki and Tangiia by these three lines we get the following result:—

By the | Tangiia | line | 66 | generations.

Iro | 69

Tangiia | 71 | (By Matatia)

Giving double weight to the first Tangiia line above, we may take the mean as 68 generations back from Tangiia, or 92 from the present time to that of Te Nga-taito-ariki. By converting this into years, we arrive at a date very far back in history, or to the year 450 B.C.

The only other line of Rarotonga which may be compared with this, is that of the Tamarua family, but it contains three groups of names on it which causes me to doubt whether it is not a cosmogony, or the three groups of names are different ones for three different persons rather than a genealogy. It originates from Tu-te-rangi-marama, the nephew of Te Nga-taito-ariki, and between him and Tangiia are 119 names instead of the mean of 68 of the other lines. By taking out the three doubtful groups, there are 72 left, which does not differ so much from the mean. The full line will be found in the Tamarua history, so that Polynesian scholars may then judge of its value.