Academics Agree to Pre 1350AD NZ Settlement
Despite the Clear Evidence, Some Archaeologists Did Not Want to Accept the Story the Bones Told: That the Accepted Theory of Human Settlement in NZ from AD1200-1300 was INCORRECT
Ancient Rat and Moa Bones Point the Way to Early Settlement
Human settlement in New Zealand has been officially settled on as around 1350AD. This is what is in the ‘accepted’ history books. This is what new generations of New Zealanders are taught. The conclusion is based upon a theory that the first canoes arrived from Polynesia sometime after the violent eruption of Mount Tarawera of around 700 years ago – a cataclysmic event not mentioned in Maori oral history. Scientists basing conclusions on genetic testing calculate that “the founding population of Aotearoa must have been at least 100 to 200, including at least 50 females, in order to grow to around 100,000 with the amount of genetic diversity existing when Europeans first arrived.” This is the ‘Short Chronology’ of human settlement in New Zealand, based on the assumption that Polynesians are the only travellers to settle in New Zealand. But vital evidence proves the ‘Long Chronology’ of much earlier occupation and this evidence was reluctantly accepted by a slim majority of members at the New Zealand Archaeological Association Conference in 2002. So, what are the facts?
Who Ate all the Moa?
The fate of the Moa has intrigued researchers since Europeans first arrived in New Zealand, as a huge number of Moa skeletons surfaced right around the country. Julius Haast, PH.D. and Member of the Royal society wrote several papers in the 1870s, listing painstaking evidence leading to his conclusion that Moa were hunted to extinction by an ancient people who inhabited New Zealand before Maori. He said: “It has been the fashion to assert that the present native inhabitants of New Zealand, the Maoris, are the race who have hunted and exterminated the Moa… it is my duty to examine the data and bring in turn what I consider overwhelming evidence to the contrary, namely that the forefathers of the Maoris not only have neither hunted nor exterminated the Moa, but that they knew nothing about it…Haast quoted an earlier exhaustive study by Rev. William Colenso in which he wrote: “From native traditions we gain nothing to aid us in our enquiries after the probable age in which this animal lived; for although New Zealand abounds in traditionary lore, both natured and supernatural, he appears to be totally ignorant of anything concerning the Moa… If such an animal ever existed within the time of the present race of New Zealanders, surely to a people possessing no quadruped and but very scantily with both animal and vegetable food, the chase and capture of such a creature would not only be a grand achievement, but one also, from its importance, not likely to be ever forgotten; that many thing of comparatively minor importance are by them handed down from father to son in continued succession from the very night of history.” It appears Maori had virtually no first hand knowledge of moa.
Haast commented that early voyagers, Captain Cook, Captain Vancouver, Admiral d’Entrecasteaux and Captain King noted down carefully local flora and fauna and the “traditions of the natives,” with no mention of the existence of the Moa. He concluded that Moa flourished in the post-pliocene period (from 2.588 million years ago), because most of the huge quantities of their bones were found in alluvium of that era. Stone implements and flint tools found with the bones closely resembled those found in post-pliocene beds in Europe.
In 1868 Haast received two ancient human skulls found in shifting sandhills near an encampment of moa hunters “near the Selwyn” and sent it to Professor Dr C. G. Carus, the president of the Imperial German Academy of Nauralists. This eminent physiologist informed Haast he was mistaken in identifying them as Maori, as they belonged to “some other race.” Haast also noted: “The natives assert that in the interior of the North Island a race had existed called Maero, which they described as wild men of the woods, and somewhat like Australians..”
Botanist and geologist Rev. Richard Taylor researched Maori traditions, finding that when the Hawaiiki immigrants landed, they found a race of black people using moa bone and flint tools. These “ancient inhabitants of the island, called “wild men of the woods” were known as Maero and Mohoao, found throughout the country. They were wiped out by the Polynesians in Waitara and Patea. ( Te Ika a Maui published 1855) The Tainui whakapapa Nga iwi o Tainui by Pei Te Hurinui Jones and Bruce Biggs (P.14 2.2) says: “Toi found the following tribes here: the Winiwini, the Ruataamore, the Pananehu, the Maru-iwi and the Tai-taawaro. These people occupied the land from Southland to Oo-a-Kura in Taranaki, from Auckland to Hauraki, and certain parts of the East Coast. It is said that these people were not like Maoris, for some of them were very black, and they had flat knees. The local women ran after Toi’s men because they were so handsome. Their offspring were incorporated into the local people, and known as the Multitude-of-Toi.” Note: In 1925 a boomerang was found by Mr A.W.B. Powell in ancient middens at Muriwai Beach. It had clearly been buried for a considerable time. Some early writers attributed the origin of the black skinned people spoken of by Maori to be Melanesia.
A study using the variability of mitochondrial DNA in 2002 estimated all Moa species to number 3-12 million 6,000 years BP ago, dropping to 159,000 before AD 1280. There is no evidence disease played a part in the bird’s demise, but there is ample evidence of the presence of humans much earlier than AD 1280.
NEW ZEALAND INSTITUTE (From the Wellington Independent, September 24, 1868)
On Saturday, there was a large audience at the Colonial Museum, presided over by his Excellency the Governor, to hear a highly interesting and suggestive lecture, by the Hon. Mr. Mantell, on the Moa….(abridged) Dr Hector, in proposing a vote of thanks to the lecturer, remarked that it was highly valuable to have obtained the expression of his opinions respecting the association of the Moa with the Aborigines (original peoples of the land) of this colony. As Mr. Mantell had arrived in this country well qualified for the task by previous training, and had enjoyed favourable opportunities as the first explorer of a large extent of the colony where these birds formerly abounded. The collections in the Museums in Europe and America show how well he availed himself of these opportunities. He (Dr. Hector) understood Mr. Mantell to incline to the opinion, that the Moa owed its destruction to a race of aborigines different in their habits and savage attainments from the Maoris of the present day, though perhaps having the same origin…Mr. Travers remarked with regard to the origin of the aborigines by whom the Moa were exterminated, and that he considered them to be a distinct race, now represented by the Morioris of the Chatham Islands. He impressed on the attention of the meeting the important field which New Zealand offered for ethnological research, and related as a circumstance requiring explanation that in a certain pit in the Waikato, a number of human skeletons were found in an erect position arranged around the side, each with a block of wood on its head. It is hoped that someone will investigate the matter.
The Hunters
In the 1800s, some Maori spoke of hunting and eating Moa. The New Zealand Institute commented in 1892 on The Antiquity of the Moa by Captain Gilbert Mair: “When Maoris of to-day had legends to tell concerning the moa they were all of such preposterous and mythical character that they proved the truth of what the old chiefs of fifty years ago alleged – viz., Neither they nor their forefathers had ever seen the moa, because the last moas were destroyed at the time of the Deluge. That the Dinornis (moa) had been killed and cooked by men in New Zealand was certain from the geological evidence, but that the Polynesian Maori had known the Dinornis at all was highly improbable. Possibly vague accounts had been handed down from the prehistoric inhabitants (moa-hunters), with whom it was almost certain the Polynesian immigrants had intermarried.”
The Evening Post reported ‘An Interesting Relic’ on September 11, 1888: A mummy discovered by a Mr Champness on the West Taieri River in 1864 was found in an 80ft deep cave with a 30ft leg bone of an extinct moa lying across the head. Plaited human hair was around the neck and the skeleton of a tui between the knees. Experts at the British Museum pronounced it to be the remains of an adult woman, whose height when alive was not more than 3ft. The Government Geologist of NZ, Dr Hector said the mummy was over 1000 years old, of the race of people who inhabited the island before the Maoris. Several specimens of this race had been discovered but this was the most perfect.
In the 1970s, researcher Russell Price, aided by large support teams, found conclusive evidence of human activity in the Hawkes Bay before the 1350BC Waimihia volcanic ash fall, verified by the country’s leading pedologist Alan Pullar. At this lowest level, beneath undisturbed tephra ash from the Kaharoa Fall (Mt Tarawera) of 1100AD, the Taupo Fall (186AD) and Waimihia, cooked moa bones were found. Some had marks cut by a sharp stone implement.
Our Most Significant Import? Rats!
Non-human bones are invaluable as a way to prove the antiquity of human settlement in New Zealand, invaluable because, unlike human remains, they are not subject to tapu and can be analysed scientifically and without prejudice. In 1996 a dramatic discovery divided the scientific community. Zoologist Richard Holdaway discovered and radiocarbon dated kiore (Pacific rat) bones at older than 2000 B.P. (Before the Present, 1950). He had set out to confirm the Late Chronology, but reported his findings in a true scientific manner. These rats could not have made their own way to New Zealand. They had to come with man. DNA studies (Matisoo-Smith et al 1998) indicated several lineages of kiore with separate origins, suggesting multiple immigrations. Not all rat bones were found on the coast, some were well inland and were under Taupo ash, which has an age of c. 1800 B.P. Holdaway used the same precise measuring of undisturbed ash band layering as Russell Price to back up the date for the bones. Holdaway had set out to confirm the Short Chronology, but reported the contradicting findings in a true scientific manner.
Despite the clear evidence, some archaeologists did not want to accept the story the bones told: that the accepted theory of human settlement in New Zealand from AD1200-1300 was incorrect. The method of ash layer dating was vigorously attacked, but intensive retesting found it to be sound. A vote at the 2002 Archaeological Association Conference was split – 27 voted for and 24 against early human arrival. There was eventually a majority consensus that humans had brought the rats to New Zealand in 100AD, but didn’t stay.
Professor John Flenley, then Head of the Geology Department at Massey University, commented on pre-1300AD settlement: “I think they (Maori) came but remained in small numbers because, apart from hunting and fishing they couldn’t really get much to eat. Their tropical crops couldn’t grow very well.” This ignores the evidence that early Maori found a large populace with well established gardens already here (taro, kumera, yams, several species of potato. South American type stone "potato God" statuettes were found on Mokoia Island in Lake Rotorua and around the Auckland Isthmus. The latter are on display at the Auckland War Memorial Museum. Plentiful food was, and still is, yielded by the forests and internal waterways – eg pikopiko, huhu grubs, te kouka, puha, harore, eels, koura (fresh water crayfish), as well as birds, berries and kaimoana (seafood, including seaweed.) There are even ‘bush’ seasonings like the peppery horopito and mint tasting kawakawa leaves.
But entrenched ideas are hard to shift. Richard Holdaway was lucky his findings were grudgingly accepted. Professor Mike Elliott lost his post-doctorate fellowship at NIWA for submitting a paper showing that fossilised pollen, taken in core samples within silt wash deep beneath the sea off Hawkes Bay, proved evidence of significant human occupation and deforestation in the Hawkes Bay district around 600AD. The New Zealand Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences said that analysing fossilised pollen was its business and NIWA should keep out of it. Elliott’s findings were thus swept under the carpet.
If There Was Nobody Here, Who Built These?
Koru Pa at New Plymouth, Taranaki is one of several stone pas surviving in the area, two of which are massive. The plaque at Koru Pa reads: “These lands formed one of the earliest Maori settlements in New Zealand and were probably occupied from about 1000AD until 1826 when the Waikato drove the Taranaki tribes southward away from the home of their ancestors.” Oral tradition states the Pa was built by “friendly Maori,” not the later Polynesian people who were in severe decline through inter-tribal war and high infant mortality by the dawn of the 19th century. Up to 200 people, including 50 females, arriving in 1200AD could not have multiplied sufficiently to have built these fortresses, constructed in a similar style to the ancient hill forts of England, Wales and Scotland. Koru itself is typical in design to Rath/Casel structures in Ireland, complete with underground tunnels and remains of a standing stone circle lining up with Mt Taranaki, giving a clue about the heritage of the people who built the Pa.
This huge stone structure would have required considerable labour, time and stone working expertise to build. Some of the walls would have extended upward of 14 feet high and giant excavations cut through solid rock. Many other large Pa around the country fall into the same category. Turuturumokai Pa in Hawera, with evidence of a labyrinth of underground tunnels would have taken thousands of labourers to construct and defend, its size presumably intended to protect a very large population: How could a small migration of Polynesians in 1300AD build these and why? None were built in their homelands, where warfare was rife.
Moa, rats and stone buildings:
The figures simply don’t add up to a Short Chronology. It seems academics are starting to agree. “The timing of the human discovery and colonization of New Zealand” (2007), a paper by professors of the University of Waikato and Massey, including Prof. John Flenley, recognises the Long Chronology as “the most plausible hypothesis.” (available online at www.sciencedirect.com)
When will we get to see this confirmed in our history books, government websites (used for school projects) and tourist guidebooks?
EDITOR: This concludes the current series of New Zealand History Under Siege. The series will resume later in the year with in-depth investigation into the peoples Maori found when they arrived in NZ, revealing startling new evidence about the tiny Turehu people. PLUS Poukawa: Our most shameful archaeological coverup.
The compilation of all NZ history articles will be available as a separate publication in the near future. You can pre-order a copy by sending your name, phone number, email address to elocal magazine.