MAORI HISTORY OF AUCKLAND.

Auckland Star, Volume LIII, Issue 91, 18 April 1922, Page 2

MAORI HISTORY OF AUCKLAND.

(To the Editors Sir,—Tn a criticism of the boot prepared by our Public Librarian (Mr. John Barr), "The City of Auckland," is a brief reference to the Maori section, contributed by mc. The critic disposes of mc tensely in a few lines, and states that the dates are purely fanciful. From this expression of opinion I must entirely disagree. The narrative as given by mc is the result of much investigation by direct inquiries over a long period among the natives; my notes thus compiled I 'found substantiated by a careful comparative study of the copious literary matter bequeathed to us by such eminent authorities as Percy Smith, Elsdon Best, Major Gudgeon, and Judge Fenton; and among prominent Maori chiefs such as the late Tuhaere (whose manuscript "History" is in the Public Library), PaUra te Tu-i, Xc Whatahoro, and others. The eventg of Maori hi-tory are for the most part capable of being fixed as to date to within 30 years or so for many centuries past. This result is attained by a careful comparison of the elaborate genealogical tables banded down to the present generation. Many hundreds of these tables are now on record, and, having passed the severe test of comparison and cross-examina-tion, are accepted as correct by the Native Land Department. Mr. PercySmith says: "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 a pretension to chiefdom to be able to recite his pedigree for at least 20 generations, and to know the family alliances to remote degrees." And this is true to this day in respect to all Maori families of rank. Even those of very humble birth are very efficient in this survival of ancient Maori knowledge. I have myself on numerous occasions noted down from natives their family tables—the reciter often giving hundreds of names, embracing the main lineal descent: and without difficulty also (if asked) giving many branch lines of ancestral connections with other tribes. These, when compared with otherwise recorded tables are invariably found to Agree in all essentials. I _jave also heard Rarotongan, Tahitian, Chatham Island, and other Polynesians recite their ancient pedigrees for the edification of our local native chiefs; and such always agreed with the Maori in all important details. Yet those branches of the race have been separated for hundreds of years—at least since about 1-350 A.D. Sow it is wholly by means of these tables that we can fix dates; approximate they may be, but they never err more than a decade or so over a period of centuries. Tlie Polynesian Society (which ia the foremost recognised authority in these matters), after much study and comparative research, has accepted them as reliable. The method it adopts in fixing dates in Maori history is, to count 25 years to a generation. The dates of the leading epoch marking eventg given by mc are those given, by Mr. Percy Smith, in respect of the periods of Toi-kai-Kakau arrival in N".Z. (1150 A.D.). and also the arrival of the Tainui and other canoes (1330 A.D.). These dates are arrived at after comparing the many tribal genealogical tables (as at 1000 A.D.); they show an average of twentytwo generations from the time the arrival of the Tainui and other canoes of Tlie Fleet Toi-Kai-Kakau is placed chronologically some thirty generations ago. The other later dates (in respect of the history of this district) are those arrived at by Fenton; then comes the • advent of the European era, when we have written records which enable us lo fix exact dates from at least 1720 A.D. onwards. My own voluminous notes of family pedigrees, collected independently from numerous natives of the Arawa, Urewera, Tainui, and -Ngapuhi tribes agree in the main with those otherwise recorded, and which on the similar basis of computation also confirm the dates given in every case within a decade ot so.—l am. etc.. GEO. GRAHAM.