7/31/2019 NZ 100

1/12

1

The Mori situation: the pride of the iwi, the power of the Empire.

NZ 100% Pureyou. This is the current slogan that Tourism of New Zealand

has launched as its marketing campaign and means in short words, the importance of

maintaining the countrys ecotourism and show as genuine and transparent as possible,

to exhibit the nation in its natural essence. This current campaign has evolved from the

iconic New Zealand 100% Pure advertising message, first launched in 1999. This new

message with the addition ofyou, aims to personalise the country holiday experience

and bring to life the tourism experiences available in New Zealand.

There, where colliding two strong bodies of water, the Tasman Sea and the

Pacific Ocean appear these two islands that make up this country which is New

Zealand, the land of the end of the world. A country in size resembling the Japan

islands, it is perhaps the perfect example of the only place on the planet that still retains

the aspect which had land when we did not even live there.

The isolation in which the two islands are allowed to keep its animals species

that seem to be from another time, such as the ancient kiwi bird, considered nowadays

as a national symbol in Aotearoa1, so much so that kiwi is the nickname used

internationally for New Zealanders as well as being a relatively common self-reference.

A country that little lasted this isolation, but still faithfully keeps and preserves

traditions, symbols and myths.

In developing this essay, firstly we will discover New Zealand from its essential

origins; secondly, how it suffered the hammer of colonization and its evolution into the

assimilation of a different lifestyle and culture, and finally the readjustment to new

changes until the current situation that shows us a multicultural reality, but in certain

legal and political purposes is considered as bi-cultural.

1.Aotearoa: most widely known and accepted Moriname for New Zealand, the land of the long white cloud

7/31/2019 NZ 100

2/12

2

The origins of New Zealand and its inhabitants are now told as traditional tales

that some of them are richly provided of myths and symbology, and others are loaded

with formal foundation. According to Philippa Mein Smith and following her bookA

concise History of New Zealand, the birth of this nation has to do with the first

settlers set out from a place called Hawaiki, a homeland that recurs in stories throughout

Polynesia (7).

There exist many theories and researches about the location of this mythical

island, but all describe Hawaiki as some kind of originating point. One early

interpretation was by the scholar, S. Percy Smith, founding president of the Polynesian

Society and author of numerous texts on tribal history and traditions. In his book

Hawaiki, the original homeland of theMori(1904), he suggested a physical location

of Hawaiki, that would be the island of Java near Indonesia. Hawaiki is often referred to

in songs, proverbs and genealogies. For example, parents welcome their newborn

children with the phrase2:

E taku potiki, kua putamai rakoe i te toi i Hawaiki

My child, you are born from the source, which is at Hawaiki.

Similarly, orators farewell the dead with the phrase:

E nga mate, haere ki Hawaiki, ki Hawaiki nui, ki Hawaiki roa,

Ki Hawaikipamamao

To the dead, depart to Hawaiki, to great Hawaiki, to long

Hawaiki, to distant Hawaiki

There is a point at the North Island, the northwesternmost tip of the Aupouri

Peninsula, this is Cape Reinga. The name of this cape comes from the Mori word

Reinga that means the underworld. Another Mori name is Te Rerenga Wairua,

meaning the leaping-off place of spirits. Both refer to the legend of Hawaiki that is the

place from which we are born, and it is where we go after we die. Hawaiki, therefore is

deeply associated with the cycle of birth, life and death.

2.Phrase taken from Te Ara the Encyclopedia of New Zealand

7/31/2019 NZ 100

3/12

3

In addition to this, there are many ideas ofMori origins. Following Te Ara and

the words of K. R. Howe, distinguished Professor of Anthropology at Massey

University Albany, are Mori descendants of the Greek and Egyptians?And did they

arrive in one great fleet of canoes? From their earliest encounters with Mori, European

scholars were fascinated by the origins of New Zealands inhabitants. More recently,

scientific research has revealed compelling evidence of a Polynesian origin for Mori.

Three developments made possible this Mori Odyssey. Early ideas explain

when Europeans discovered New Zealand, they wondered about the origins of the

Mori people. Captain James Cook noticed that Polynesians and Mori had similar

appearances and cultures. He believed they had migrated from the islands of South-East

Asia. It is still agreed that Mori are Polynesians whose ancestors lived in the Taiwan

region. Some early visitors, who studied items such as headdresses and carvings,

thought Mori ancestors might be ancient Greeks or Egyptians. One artist painted a

Mori as a Roman warrior. Christian missionaries suggested that Mori ancestors were

Jewish, belonging to the Lost Tribes of Israel.

Another idea is theAryan theory by which in the 1850s scholars discovered that

most European languages had developed from Sanskrit, the ancient language of India. It

is still believed that Europeans and Indians share ancestors, known as Aryan or

Caucasian. Ethnologists such as Edward Tregear claimed that Mori, too, had come

from India. He found similarities between Mori and Sanskrit words and symbols.

Furthermore, in the 19th

century many scholaras recorded different Mori stories

about reaching New Zealand from Polynesia. S. Percy Smithcalculated from listening

to Mori histories that they had migrated together in 1350 AD, in the called Great Fleet

story of seven canoes.

7/31/2019 NZ 100

4/12

4

According to Smith, they had then conquered the Moriori, who he said were a

primitive Melanesian race already living in New Zealand. Smiths story was accepted

for over 60 years. It was popular because many believed that European settlers were the

next superior people, who would take over from Mori.

From the 1920s scientists proved that Chatham Island Moriori, like Mori, were

descendants of the original Polynesian settlers of New Zealand. Moriori had migrated to

the Chatham Islands sometime after 1300 AD, possibly around 1500.

In the 1960s errors were found in Percy Smiths research for the Great Fleet

story. Recent scientific evidence includes DNA analysis, and radiocarbon dating of

archaeological sites. It is now believed that Mori arrived at different times, from

several points in East Polynesia, in the late 13th century.

P. Mein Smith describes,

Who Mori were before they encountered Europe is not the

same as Mori were in the 19th

or 20th

centuries. Tangata Whenua,

literallypeople of the Land, did not become Mori until they engaged

with Europeans and faced being colonized. Conversely, Europeans

only gradually became Pakeha. The term Mori entered general use in

the 1860s, to distinguish ordinary people from the newcomers, at the

very moment when ordinary folk found themselves outnumbered by

Europeans (16)

The founding people of Mori New Zealanders based their social structure on

tribes called the iwi. Within each iwi are many descent groups, hapeach of which is

made up of one or more whnau, extended families. The bond that holds them together

is one of kinship, both with a founding ancestor and with the many members of their

iwi, hap and whnau today.

7/31/2019 NZ 100

5/12

5

As any tribal society, activities such as the building of a fortified refuge or large-

scale fishing were done by hap under the leadership of the rangatira, who is the chief

(male or female) and works as hard as ordinary workers. Their main activities are

characterised by the needs of the tribe and have a seasonal nature. A man could work in

different roles if the tribe needs it. Clearing land, planting, harvesting, fishing and

fowling were all seasonal tasks.

Rather than being a fowler, a gardener or a fisher, a worker would change from

one activity to another through the year as dictated by the needs of the family. All men

were workers, and if war came, they were warriors too. There were a number of

specialists, known as tohunga. The branch of work they were engaged in would be

indicated in their full title. A tohunga whakairo was a carver, tohunga whaihanga was a

builder, tohunga trai waka a canoe builder and tohunga tmokoa tattooist.

For Mori society the symbolism of tattooing is of great importance. Captain

James Cook was the first European to witness the ritual of tattooing during his first

travels in 1769. The process ofTa moko was a painful process done by fine cuts in the

skin with serrated chisel and mallet to then, filled with pigments into the open wound.

The facial tattoo of Mori tribes consisted of a decoration based on combinations of

spirals with a series of lines forming a symmetrical model which were drawn with great

finesse and elegance.

An elegantly tattooed face was a great source of pride to a warrior, and that,

made him fierce in battle and attractive to women. The older men were decorated

deeper. Most of them had spiral figures drawn on his lips, and some had marked thighs

and bellies. The chiefs had the head and body covered with designs of extreme delicacy

and beauty.

http://www.teara.govt.nz/glossary#tohungahttp://www.teara.govt.nz/glossary#tohungahttp://www.teara.govt.nz/glossary#mokohttp://www.teara.govt.nz/glossary#mokohttp://www.teara.govt.nz/glossary#mokohttp://www.teara.govt.nz/glossary#mokohttp://www.teara.govt.nz/glossary#tohunga

7/31/2019 NZ 100

6/12

6

Tattooed heads were seen as a brand identity, a sign of distinction where each

tattoo shows the dignity of the person. It is therefore not difficult to understand that the

tradition of preserving the enemies heads in warfare, such as intertribal wars, was a

common practice among Mori warriors. These tattooed heads were a coveted prize for

tribes and were seen as trophies which were embalmed and preserved for a lifetime.

This honor was usually reserved for people of great social status. The head remained

with the families stored in ceremonial boxes, finely carved.

With the arrival of Europeans in the first decade of the 19th

century, the tattooed

heads were a big claim, and that meant the superiority of those over the native tribes. It

was later in this decade when European settlers were in regular contact with Mori

tribes who lived along the coast. The Mori found that these settlers exchanged muskets

for tattooed heads, and during the intertribal wars, many Mori warriors made

incursions with neighbor tribes with the main purpose of getting tattooed heads to then

exchange them for weapons. European dealers took the heads and sold them with

outrageous prices to museums and private collections.

So here we have, in my humble opinion, the basis of a thriving business that

unleashed what it called The Musket Wars. At the beginning, the British government

looked favorably and allowed such trade, and as I said before it was a prosperous,

successful and thrifty business. It all came to a point reached where Mori tattooed the

heads of slaves and plebeians so they can be sold. And even the tattoos on their heads

began to lose quality giving place to mediocre or unfinished tattoos. But in 1830, stories

of the horrors associated with tribal warfare, headhunting and subsequent sale were

scandals that were reflected on the British tabloids. The British government could not

stop this trade until 1840, key date when New Zealand was adopted as a British colony

through the Treaty of Waitangi.

7/31/2019 NZ 100

7/12

7

Thousands of Mori died and more were enslaved or became refugees in the

Musket Wars from the 1810s to 1830s.

Two tattooed heads were easier to get or to make than a

shipload of dressed flax or two tonnes of potatoes. Two heads bought

one musket: and as the Musket Wars raged, Maori needed more

human currency. So the practice arose of tattooing slaves as well as

chiefs.These are words from the former Auckland Museum

ethnologist Dave Simmons taken from the article The Trade in

preserved Moriheads,Fairfax NZ News (2009).It is worth highlighting the figure of the Major-General Horatio Gordon Robley

(1840-1930) soldier, artist and a collector of heads. In New Zealand, Gordon Robley

had many opportunities of demonstrating his talent for drawing and for many years he

possessed a collection of thirty-five heads. Gordon Robley cites an anecdote about a

chief who went on board ship with several slaves. "Choose which of these heads you

like best, and when you come back I will take care to have it dried and ready for your

acceptance."

Hundreds of heads still remain in European and American museums, hospitals,

and private collections. New Zealand is trying to get them back, and not long ago, a

press release came from UNESCO when Irina Bokova, the Director-General, approved

and autorised the restitution by France to New Zealand ofMori heads kept in French

museums.

The article of UNESCOPRESS explains:

According to the law, 16 mummified and tattooed heads

in French museums, including the Museum of Natural History of

the city of Rouen and the Paris Quai Branly Museum, will be

returned to New Zealand.

7/31/2019 NZ 100

8/12

8

[]

According to Maori tradition, preserving the heads of

ancestors contributes to keeping their spirit alive. The Maori heads

that France will return to New Zealand have been in French

museums since the 19th century.

In short, this business and trade seriously hit to the identity and dignity ofMori

soul and not only their heads were stolen, after then, soon would begin the acquisition

of the land.

In the late 1830s, an increasing number of British immigrants arrived in New

Zealand with the only plan of extensive settlement; around this time there were large-

scale land transactions with Mori, unruly behaviour by some settlers and signs that the

French were interested in annexing New Zealand. The British government was initially

unwilling to act, but it eventually realised that annexing the country could protect

Mori, regulate British subjects and secure commercial interests.

Lieutenant-Governor William Hobson had the task of securing British

sovereignty over New Zealand and signed with the help of representatives of the British

Crown and more than forty Mori chiefs, the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840. This

founding paper, not considered as a constitution, was written using the two languages,

Mori and English and states principles by which British officials and rangatira made a

political contract to found a nation state and build a government in New Zealand to deal

with pressing new circumstances. What does the Treaty say?

Following Te Ara, the Treaty has composed by three articles. In the English

version, Mori cede the sovereignty of New Zealand to Britain; Mori give the Crown

an exclusive right to buy lands they wish to sell and, in return, are guaranteed full rights

of ownership of their lands, forests, fisheries and other possessions; and Mori are given

the rights and privileges of British subjects.

7/31/2019 NZ 100

9/12

9

The Treaty in Mori was deemed to convey the meaning of the English version,

but there are important differences. Most significantly, in the Mori version the word

sovereignty was translated as kawanatanga (governance). Some Mori believed that

the governor would have authority over the settlers alone; others thought that were

giving up the government over their lands but retaining the right to manage their own

affairs. The English version guaranteed undisturbed possession of all properties, but

the Mori version guaranteed tino rangatiratanga (full authority) over taonga

(treasures, which can be intangible). The precise nature of the exchange within the

Treaty of Waitangi is a matter of debate.

In my opinion, the point is that is again the power behind the good hands of the

British over the indigeneity. We can see this not only in the two versions of the treaty in

which the English and Mori versions differ, but also in all the historical facts that

followed to the sign of that treaty. Thousands of hectares of land expropriated, stolen,

while Mori were agree to the treaty and calm inside the British security.

The three main ways in which Mori tribes lost land and associated resources

were:

Government purchases of Mori land at low prices and where land reserveswere promised to Mori, these were either not provided or were inadequate to

sustain their communities.

Confiscation (raupatu) of lands following the Wars of the 1860s. The operations of the Native Land Court, which individualized titles to

collectively owned tribal lands, making it easier for them to be sold.

In 1841, the missionary George Clarke took position of Protector of Aborigines,

but Clarke and his staff were given a second, conflicting role as land purchasers for the

Crown. Although Clarke managed to persuade the Governor Hobson to free him of the

land purchasing responsibilities, which clearly conflicted with his protective role, his

7/31/2019 NZ 100

10/12

10

sub-protectors still retained their dual roles. From 1842, land claims commissioners

investigated all land purchases made before the signing of the Treaty. If the

commissioners concluded that a purchase was made in good faith, they could validate it

and award a Crown Grant of up to 4 square miles (1037 ha). If the purchase was invalid

or exceeded that size, the excess land became Crown land. Commissioner William

Spain investigated the huge purchases claimed by the New Zealand Company. He

determined that most of those in Wellington and elsewhere were invalid, but not all his

recommendations were acted upon. There was subsequently a shift to arbitrating

agreements with Mori to allow settlement in Wellington to go ahead.

But it was in 1846 the British government instructed that all Mori

landownership was to be registered; land deemed to be unused or surplus was to

become Crown land. During the Wars of the land, in 1860s the total area affected by

confiscations was about 607,500 ha (1.5 million acres).

The New Zealand Settlements Act in 1863 authorised the taking of land from

Mori; the purpose of this legal paper was to punish rebel Mori, those who did not sign

the Treaty or did not want to sell their lands and become puppets of the British. So that,

there were two sides; one side the group with the king ofMori (called the kingitanga

movement) and the other side, those tribes who were for the Crown.

The Act was introduced by the Native Minister, Sir William Fox, who said its

primary purpose was to suppress the "present rebellion". The word "confiscation did

not appear in the legislation. The minister conceded that land of Mori who was not "in

rebellion" could also be confiscated, but said they would be entitled to compensation

through Compensation Court. Here we can see another example of the power of the

British Empire and its double morality, to protect the people from future insurrections

(of those who are the real owners of their land) and keep the peace. In return, the lands

that were confiscated used to be military sites; those lands which were not used, were

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Fox_%28New_Zealand%29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Fox_%28New_Zealand%29

7/31/2019 NZ 100

11/12

11

sold and with the money obtained, pakeha defrayed the costs of fighting with Mori.

Furthermore, Mori could own land in exchange if they join the military service and so,

the British government would acquire and guarantee soldiers at a very low cost.

Nowadays, the status of the Treaty has evolved over time. Unlike many other

countries, New Zealand does not have a constitution in the form of a single document. It

has a collection of common laws that establish the framework of government. The

Treaty was the initial agreement that established British authority. This authority was

later transferred to the New Zealand Parliament. In 1975 the Waitangi Tribunal was

established to consider claims by Mori against the Crown regarding breaches of

principles of the Treaty and to make recommendations to government to remove the

prejudice and provide recompense. Since 1985 the tribunal has been able to consider

Crown acts and omissions dating back to 1840. This has provided Mori with an

important means to have their grievances against the actions of past governments

investigated.

Last but not least I would like to express the current Mori situation following a

report (31 of May 2011) of the United Nations and the Office of the High

Commissioner for Human Rights by which the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of

indigenous peoples, James Anaya, explains that the principal focus of the report is an

examination of the processor settling historical and contemporary claims based on the

Treaty of Waitangi, although other key issues are also addressed, especially the advance

on the rights ofMori peoples that should be promoted, consolidated and strengthened;

additionally to secure Mori political participation at the national level; furthermore,

with respect to Treaty settlement negotiations, the Government should make every

effort to involve all groups that have interest in the issues under consideration.

7/31/2019 NZ 100

12/12

12

And finally, is taken into account the extreme disadvantage in the social and

economic conditions ofMori people in comparison to the rest of New Zealand society.

In conclusion, the Special Rapporteur ends explaining that is necessary for this

bi-culturalism, Mori and non- Mori New Zealanders to move forward as true partners

in the future.

I find it difficult to reach a conclusion but I am tempted to say that New Zealand

of current days is and evolution and little is left of its cultural essence. The hammer

colonization led to the creation of a nation that today is considered 100% pure, but

invented by the British.