North Island & South Island
The Geographic Board is looking to give the North Island and South Island official names in English and Maori.
The likely Maori names are Te Ika a Maui for the North Island and Te Wai Pounamu for the South Island. Te Ika a Maui translated as “the fish of Maui”, based on the Maori myth that the island was formed by Maui’s gigantic catch, and Te Wai Pounamu as “the place of greenstone”.
Can’t say I have a problem with that. The current names are staying (in fact being made official) but they are very boring and over time the Maori versions may become more popular.
I don’t think you legislate these things, you let society move at its own pace. The Maori version of the National Anthem has become hugely popular over time (even if the words challenge some people). And certain Maori words such as whanau have become absolutely mainstream.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:04 am
What next, do away with the name New Zealand?
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:04 am
“North Island” and “South Island” are two of the most boring place names in the world. The Te Reo alternatives are good, “Te Wai Pounamu” particularly nice.
Bring on the change I say.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:07 am
You would make it compulsory of course Micky?
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:09 am
Auckland is quite a boring name. So is Wellington. Very unimaginative and mundane. I propose Funky-town and Love-Burrow respectively.
Won’t you take me to… that funky town… gotta move on…. do do do do do do…
yeah groovy man.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:16 am
I don’t think “The North Island” and “The South Island” are names at all.
Nobody says “I am going to South Island on Thursday” instead it is said “I am going to the south island on Thursday”.
Unlike the W(h)anganui bs this naming issue actually has some merit.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:16 am
“Little China” is far more appropiate for the North Island – unlike Te Ika a Maui it has an ‘h’
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:16 am
I think this is a great move. I agree with mickeysavage: “North Island” and “South Island” are two of the most boring place names in the world. Nobody is suggesting that there be any compulsion here (it wouldn’t work anyway), merely an official blessing of alternatives you can use if you want. I would hope that over time, the use of Te Wai Pounamu and Te Ika a Maui become more common.
As for Funky-town and Love-Burrow, you are welcome to use these terms if you wish, goodgod – but few people will understand you…. which is a pity, Funky-town is not a bad name.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:21 am
Who wouldn’t want to spend a weekend in Love-Burrow?
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:23 am
“Te Reo alternatives ” are in fact arse numblingly dull. the Maori settlers were as lacking in imagination as any one else. How many placenames start with “wai” because they’re somewhere near water.
It just sounds more ethnic in another language. We could just as well use latin for the same effect. More PC feel good crap from an insignificant board that has delusions of relevance and change for the sake of change. Didn’t really work out that well for Helen scrapping the honors system did it. Pissing off the majority to placate the noisy minority is never a smart move.
I say infitialis.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:24 am
I have a 1970s road map in my car which states both islands in Maori and English.
This proposal is therefore nothing new.
A more pertinent question would be to ask why is the South Island Maori name changed to Te Wai Pounamu
when for hundreds of YEARS it was well known as Te Waka a Maui?
And logically, neither is a fish, a canoe or solely made of stone.
And “boring” is subjective – Kiwiblog is a boring blog name but it works because its easy to remember.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:24 am
Doesn’t New Zealand also have the name Aotearoa?
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:25 am
Mickey. Not all Maori words are proper nouns.
But I agree, add the names, make them optional.
Now how can we get rid of Wainui-o-mata? Rename it? Blow up the road? Sell it to the Chinese? Give it to Palmerston Nth?
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:26 am
A hydro dam in the Cook Strait would remove the argument
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:26 am
When Cook arrived he noted down the names of the islands, notwithstanding his spelling it seems pretty clear what the names were. The islands already had names. The north and south no-names are crazy. Change them, everyone will eventually get used to it.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:33 am
Makes sense to me, though when I first heard it on the TV news they made it sound like North/South Island naming was going to go away & that had me wound up, but making it like New Zealand/Aotearoa is I think perfectly logical ( well once Te Wai Pounamu vs Te Waka a Maui is sorted out anyway ).
P.S. Edit works !!! ( helps when you format things badly ).
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:35 am
“The Maori version of the National Anthem has become hugely popular over time ”
You got some facts to back that up?
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:35 am
Lets rename Auckland… whats Maori for latte slurping swampland?
Hey marty did you know that there was more than one Maori tribe when Cook arrived and they had no concept of being one people? They also had different names for things and even different dialects.
I understand that the concentration camp guards also “got used” to it in time. Not sure thats an argument for forcing something on to people though.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:36 am
The Maori version of the national anthem is nothing to do with the national anthem, its a completely different unrelated text. It too gets by sounding ethnic.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:37 am
North Pole
South Pole
North America
South America
South Africa
North Korea
South Korea
North Carolina
South Carolina
Far East
Eastern culture
Western culture
It doesn’t seem to bother anyone else…and where can it possibly stop ? Nothing more boring than the name ‘Earth’…..but who would we be appealing to by changing that one?
Is the NZ Geographic Board just bored?
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:38 am
Considering most in New Zealand wouldn’t know North from South I think it should stay the same. What a waste of tax payers dollars! Get a brain kiwi! Do something useful and remove the H from Hui. FFS – Doh bro.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:39 am
North Island and South Island are boring. New Zealand is a kind of meaningless name linking back to some Dutch province I think. I’m all for having two optional and official names for North Island, South Island and New Zealand. Aotearoa is a MUCH nicer word when it rolls off the tongue anyway – it’d be worth it just to hear American newsreaders mangle it.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:40 am
Well said KiwiGreg, I always make a point of listening to how many people sing the Maori version at rugby tests and the like, there are very few who make the effort however when the second (English) version begins the crowd start to sing along.
Personally I think that all national anthems should be instrumental only, let the crowd sing whatever version they like and get on with the bloody game, it is bad enough having to sit through a meaningless rain dance before every ALL Black game without having two versions of our mind numbingly boring national anthem as well.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:43 am
Much ado about not much at all methinks.
I can relate to Te Wai Pounamu quite easily. Te Ika a Maui make take a little getting used to.
I have attended All Black matches in the UK and my British colleagues think it great that we sing our National Anthem in Maori and in English. A point of diffence that makes a statement about what we are.
I’m comfortable.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:43 am
I believe its correct name it “dirt” Patrick.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:44 am
D4j: Considering most in New Zealand wouldn’t know North from South I think it should stay the same. What a waste of tax payers dollars! Get a brain kiwi!
First, I would be concerned if some didn’t know the difference between north and south, but given the nature of many of your comments, I am becoming aware of some less cognitively blessed than others…
This all seems to have stemmed from research that has found that the names “North Island” and “South Island” have never been officially recognised. The Board is considering whether or not to do this and has received a request to consider the adoption of optional Maori names for the Islands. I don’t see this as a huge waste of tax-payers money. If the names are to be gazzeted or legislated, then why not consider Maori names. And why not have a board of experts consider the change, one that can receive submissions, make media statements, and informed decisions…
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:44 am
Jesus Kiwi’s are lame sometimes.
Add the names, who cares, it’ll give the tourists something to try and pronounce.
And talkback radio callers something to talk about……hi guys.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:46 am
Has been interesting how Egmont/Taranaki usage has changed over the last 20 years. seemed like a big thing at the time but people have been making their choice and it has gone pretty well.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:50 am
On Twitter from CNN: @davidmolkoCNN Nameless NZ. Any kiwis out there who want to weigh in with name suggestions for @jendelgadocnn for the North and South Islands?
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:51 am
Interesting story in today’s (22 Apr) Christchurch Press that the push for the names is the result of a 10-year crusade by one man, Keith Darroch. He says he attended a Maori school. The accompanying picture is of a blue-eyed and white-skinned man. Nothing wrong with that, but interesting.
Big Bruv at 9.04 is right. The next move may well be to replace the name New Zealand with Aotearoa. Great marketing ploy. Aotearoa is well known in the Western markets that use our exports. Well known everywhere abroad. Yeah right.
And as we have two languages, it will also be known as Land of the Long White Cloud, or LOLWC for short. That is LOL (laughing out loud) WC.
What has boredom to do with place names? The North Island and the South Island arose from customary use over the original designated English-language names. You could call a tiny Polynesian language of the broader Malay language family boring compared with the enormously rich English language, the current world’s tongue of commerce, of science, or learning generally, and of diplomacy. English has an internationally renown literature. Maori has an oral tradition and some new interesting but internationally minor novelists and poets.
It’s one thing to save Maori as a living cultural artifact. That’s fine. But promoting at a cost of eroding the role of English is just mad.
The Maorification of place names is a political move, with the main vehicle a Government appointed board chaired by a civil servant. As a long-term National supporter I find the PC names move a wake up call and an indication of how far up the Maori Party’s arse John Key has put his head.
Could there also be a danger that the Maori Party, Key, Maori activists, and white Uncle Toms push Maori language so hard that the majority begins to resent it as majority South Africans resented Afrikaans?
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:52 am
who fucking cares?
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:52 am
“A point of diffence that makes a statement about what we are.”
Ah yes, they very fact that so many Kiwi’s feel they have to make that statement is bloody embarrassing, it highlights our insecurity complex and our stupid determination to force “our culture” down the throats of everybody else in the world.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:56 am
Speaking of changing names the Republic of Rhodesia into Zimbabwe has worked well Trevor.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:57 am
Gosh, before the Europeans came, the locals were eating each other, or better say one lot was eating the other to extinction, so that is the story, no vocabulary, no parchments, nothing but the barbeque, that is the “culture” our ancestors came into….so, Ika a Maui translated as “the fish of Maui”, based on the Maori myth is the point I would like to make, it is all myth; and it is time we drew a line and that these folk move into the 21st century, get real. Besides in todays economic climate we need realism (not myths) and I amsure money can be better spent in creating or mainatining employment rather than throwing it away in “name resarch”
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:59 am
“I find the PC names move a wake up call and an indication of how far up the Maori Party’s arse John Key has put his head”
yep, that one’s a real worry
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:00 am
We could call the “The Island with Wellington on it” and “The Island with Picton on it.” I will point out that now Mt Cook has been renamed (optionally?) the news media insist on calling it Aoraki when the rest of the world still knows it as Mt Cook. Maybe that was done to stop confusion with a suburb of Wellington? I note that (almost) nobody uses “Aotearoa” in everyday speech, wheras most people use “New Zealand.” Plus if I am talking to a bunch of aussies and mention “Aotearoa” they will assume it is a town, wheras they know where New Zealand, South Island and North Island are.
People do refer to “South Island” as just that – in terms such as “South Island high country” or “South Island farmers”. Sometimes “the” is stuck in front too, such as “West Coast of the South Island”. This makes it more grammatically correct and sounds better. Plus the very fact the islands have a geographical reference built in to their name makes it pretty easy to work out where they are if you see a picture of them for the first time.
Also what is wrong with their originally proposed names of “New Munstar” and “New Ulster”? Just as valid if not more so than “Maui’s Fish” or “Maui’s Canoe” or “Island of Greenstone”. How about “Maui’s Campervan” as you are likely to see more of them in the South Island than canoes?
So to the Geographic Board – please stop altering our place names. The people of Wanganui have already decided that they don’t want an ‘h’ and I am pretty sure that renaming the North and South Islands will be touchy too
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:00 am
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Wake me up when them pesky Ma-o-ri quit trying ta steal my land Pa.
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:08 am
Good shot d4j.
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:17 am
OK, remind me again how many south island tribes signed the treaty ?
This gets really interesting because as far as I recall, the south island was “taken by discovery” as it was deemed to be uninhabited when the white fella’s arrived.
The round ballast rocks that were unloaded from Chinese ships to be replaced with Greenstone boulders for the return voyage are a hint of rich past that existed well before Polynesian settlers. I really don’t care what we call the islands – but I do want to know why every single island that has Polynesian settlers has no acknowledged history before the Polynesian settlers. I have no issues with the principle that Polynesian settlers found some islands uninhabited but all of them? Every single one was uninhabited, I don’t think so.
History is written by the survivors.
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:21 am
Apropos the naming of tthe North and South Islands by Maori;
Has anyone-else noticed that Maori had no maps before the European arrived, and that they certainly had no concept of land and costal-outlines and no way of knowing the overall shape of the country – especially that of the North Island.
After all, you can only see so much from a canoe – especially if you have to watch out for your enemies from other tribes
It seems to me, heretic that I am, that a legend has been conveniently tacked-on to something that the loathed European bought (a map), which makes me wonder too if in fact the ‘legend’ is also a ‘post-European-arrival’ invention, written to fit the map, rather than pre-existing and originating in ‘hawaikii’ – wherever that was.
Just a thought to consider . . .
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:44 am
To be frank, this move will not find favour among a certain section of the populace who are starting to feel more and more like a stranger in what they see as their own country. However this should be seen as an effort to redress a wrong that has left other sections of the populace feeling like a stranger in what they see as their own country.
I don’t have a problem with it, but there must be an acknowledgement that european history is as important to the current status of this country as pre-european history.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:00 am
Perhaps it could be noted that without British history New Zealand wouldn’t be what it is today. The same cannot be said about maori history.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:02 am
It’s a load of PC nonsense and make work by a board looking for publicity.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:11 am
There is no concensus as to what Maori called the islands either. Aoteoroa was the name that many tribes gave to the North Island, not Te ika a maui. I am comfortable with a dual name. Bit like Munich/Munchen, Vienna/Wien, Auckland/Shithole.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:17 am
What mickeysavage said.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:19 am
Paul Willi , the real mickeysavage will be turning in his grave!
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:22 am
I’m happy to wait for the results of three hundred and sixty seven huis for us to see what the “Maori concensus” is.
They’re still working on the flag thing last I heard.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:36 am
burt:
“OK, remind me again how many south island tribes signed the treaty ?”
I don’t think you need “reminded” about this issue. I think you need “told”, ’cause you obviously haven’t bothered to find out for yourself. Ngai Tahu did indeed sign the Treaty when it was brought to them by Major Thomas Bunbury. However, before he had gained the signatures of all Ngai Tahu hapu, he “declared” UK sovereignty over Te Wai Ponamu/South Island on the basis of “discovery”. Obviously, this is somewhat problematic, and tends to get glossed over in discussions of why/how the Crown came to have sovereignty over NZ. I do note, however, that Ngai Tahu don’t make much of it (cf Tuhoi) – they’re more than happy growing their assets and using these to build-up their human capital (as well as bicker amongst themselves over who should be running the ship!).
Anyone really interested in the background to the signing of the Treaty (as opposed to just wanting to vent about them damn Maori and their demands for justice) could consult http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/category/tid/133.
As for the use of “Aotearoa” in place of NZ, the all-knowing, all-encompassing wikipedia has this to say:
“The use of Aotearoa to refer to the whole of New Zealand is a post-colonial usage. In pre-colonial times, Māori did not have a commonly-used name for the whole New Zealand archipelago. Until the 20th century, ‘Aotearoa’ was used to refer to the North Island only. As an example from the late 19th century, the first issue of Huia Tangata Kotahi, a Māori language newspaper, dated 8 February 1893, contains the dedication on page 1: ‘He perehi tenei mo nga iwi Māori, katoa, o Aotearoa, mete Waipounamu’ (This is a publication for the all Māori tribes of Aotearoa and the South Island), where ‘Aotearoa’ can only mean the North Island.[4]
Historians (e.g. Michael King) have suggested that the use of Aotearoa to mean ‘New Zealand’ was initiated by Pākehā (non-Māori). He theorises that it originated from mistakes in the February 1916 School Journal and was propagated in a similar manner to the myths surrounding the Moriori. Influenced by this English-language usage, Aotearoa is now the term used in Māori.”
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:51 am
“This gets really interesting because as far as I recall, the south island was “taken by discovery” as it was deemed to be uninhabited when the white fella’s arrived.”….not sure you are taking the mickey but i think Nga Tahu would beg to differ.Did not Abel tasman meet Maori in Golden Bay or were they tanned white fellas.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:51 am
What this shows is that usage changes and words are modified with time.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:54 am
AG
If your comment “just wanting to vent about them damn Maori and their demands for justice” was aimed at me then you have picked the wrong target. I have advocated for many years that treaty settlements need to be advanced and dealt with as soon as possible. Thankfully this thinking is catching on in govt and we are seeing real progress now. A few years ago I was suggesting that we take the Cullen fund and use it to settle grievances as fast as possible because the inflation of money is less than the inflation of land and basically settling grievances is getting more and more expensive every year. Add to this the gravy train of lawyers etc that are along for the ride which is a cost that can never be recovered.
I do still however wonder about Polynesian settlers and the history of the Pacific and the Moriori story is interesting in that context. This story has changed from “chased off to the Chatham Islands by the Maori” which was the story told till about the mid 80’s when it changed to “Never lived in NZ, only visited from time to time”.
Which makes me wonder… why would a race of people choose the Chatham Islands to live in and visit NZ from time to time rather than live in NZ? One place has everything you could ever need for a comfortable existence and the other is a small windswept hole in the middle of nowhere… almost like a place you would retreat to for survival.
The past is the past, there is no need to deny the odorous bits because they are only odorous in today’s context. At the time it was the norm for people to arrive and slaughter the current occupants and claim ownership of the land. Sure it’s a little bit short of some romantic tale of great adventure and bravery, but it’s history not some kids story that needs to be sanitized.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:58 am
Nobody is proposing that any name be “changed”.
Nobody is proposing that any name be abolished.
All the Geographic Board is proposing is that you can use alternate names, if you want to.
This is fine by me. It is called freedom, a concept I rather approve of.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:15 pm
KiwiGreg: ‘ “The Maori version of the National Anthem has become hugely popular over time ”
You got some facts to back that up? ‘
Umm the fact that at sports events (i.e. All Blacks matches) it is sung in te reo first before going into the english version…
I aren’t too worried by this whole thing, it seems that nothing is really going to change as it will still be North and South Island and Stewart Island and I presume there will be brackets with the maori names like the map MrTips mentioned.
But the subtext of the whole issue was interesting, we are going to be losing our free plastic bags at supermarket and this one comes on the news and everyone wrongly thinks the names South/North Island etc are going so the reaction was predictable.
The interesting thing is that the perception of so called PCness being imposed by bureaucrats was something of the previous govt, this seems just like a hangover from that era (i.e. some of these bureaucrats may have been hired by the last govt). Even if they were proposing removing the current names (South Is etc) I am sure it wouldn’t get passed by the govt, remember as long as we have Wayne Mapp there it wouldn’t happen…
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:15 pm
AG, thanks for this summary, very useful.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:36 pm
But Burt
It is exactly this ‘norm for people to arrive and slaughter the current occupants’ that is the problem in the eyes of the PC and Maori-separateness Brigade.!
According to them, pre-European Maori lived in a ‘Golden age’. There was no cannabilism, there was no constant warfare or utu, there was not disharmony, everyone sat around, grew crops, composed haka and played nose-flutes. All together, all as ‘one nation’. In short, everything was rosy.
It was only the B ——- European who stuffed things up!
Maori and their-apologists do not want to know that in fact their ancestors killed and ate each other, that they were always fighting or preparing to fight, that there was actually no such thing as ‘New Zealand’ (or Aotearoa if you must) and each tribe was hell-bent on destroying the other for all sorts of reasons. They also had no written language and no ‘culture’ as we of European ancestry understand it, and were in thrall to unumerable superstions and dieties.
They weren’t even the first to be here!!!
(And yes, Maori DID invade the Chathams and DID eat the locals – and that can be verified!).
The fact that Maori DID have such an existence and that the European with his writing-ability and technology (cameras etc) was able to document these practices is seen by the apologists to be inconvenient and must be espunged, so what better way to do it than to start in the schools?
Teach the children the ‘politically-correct’ – ‘The European wrecked everything’ – line from an early age and they will believe it, and this is what is happening, and woe betide any child or parent who dares challenge this perceived wisdom (It’s called ‘Maori bashing’ I’ve discovered).
New Zealand history IS being delibrately sanitised, the truth must NEVER be told and Maori must never be made to feel ‘inferior’ (whatever THAT may mean), because, after all, it’s all the White man’s fault, and Maori were such peaceful people before the nasty, horrible, cunning and despicable European arrived.
Can I start to tell a fairy story? ‘Once upon a time , before the big bad Pakeha came to Aotearoa and ruined everything, there were a most Wonderful, most Caring, most Peaceful people called Maori . . . ‘
(Methinks that if you believe that, you’ll believe anything . . .)
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:51 pm
You are correct Trevor, people have made their choice.
In fact the number of people who use the a different PC name for Egmont that I’ve met would be, exactly, zero.
Good choice.
Now if the geographic PC wankers were to be realists instead of the jokes Wanganui showed them up to be the two islands would revert to their more correct names (officially).
North Island = Pig Island
South Island = The Mainland
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:52 pm
Shut down the Geogrpahic Board.
It is an unaffordable extravagance.
Not needed. Useless waste of resources.
Shut it down and fire its employees and give the producers in this country their money back.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:59 pm
reddy,
“Shut it down and fire its employees and give the producers in this country their money back.”
But they are just being “smart operators”, who are making a buck any way they can. This is a good thing, isn’t it? Remember how great it was when the Crown ripped off Maori over the purchase of land in Auckland? How praiseworthy you thought that was??
So – if the “producers in this country” should “get their money back” from the Geographic Board, why don’t Maori get recompense for the Crown’s profiting off them? One law for all, right??
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:08 pm
Yawn, more self strangling convoluted rubbish.
Haven’t you got anything but self serving rubbish so full of logic holes it is totally dismissive and not even good for a laugh?
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:14 pm
I think you mean “dismissible”. You are being “dismissive”.
As for having a laugh, you really, really, really should look at http://www.salon.com/comics/tomo/2009/04/14/tomo/index.html. Seriously. It’s like the artist has visited you in your basement …
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:22 pm
I have come up with a brilliant solution to the issue of how to satisfy Maori without going overboard on the issue of naming the islands of this great nation.
I blogged about it today — I think everyone will agree that it is simple but effective.
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:33 pm
Once again REDBAITER comes up with the soundest suggestion. This Govenment promised it was going to cut waste and extravagance out of the system. This board is a good place to start, I understand only the Chairman and one other were not recent appointments by Helen Clark. Their prime purpose seems to be to create wasteful mischief. If there is merit in the proposals why can’t the proposer make them through their own member of parliament who can test them before his caucus. There is simply no need for all these boards and commissions, our elected representatives should be doing the job.
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:35 pm
“originating in ‘hawaikii’ – wherever that was.”
Komata, call me naive, but I’m prepared to put a few bob on Hawaiiki being ooh, Hawaii? I’m amazed that I’ve never heard anyone voice this opinion in this country.
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:37 pm
I think they should be changed to:
Maori Island
and
Tukuldwhorusbros (meaning too cold for us Maoris).
In that way it would be equal half English/half Maori.
April 22nd, 2009 at 4:40 pm
Bearhunter…I think Hawaikii is generally accepted as being Tahiti.(though I might be wrong)
April 22nd, 2009 at 5:02 pm
(Scub that comment) – self edit
April 22nd, 2009 at 7:44 pm
Bearhunter
An interesting question.
The exact location of Hawiiki is uncertain, but is generaly believed to be somewhere in the Macquesis Island Group, which is situated roughly North/North East of New Zealand, with Tahiti being the most well-known of the islands in the area, which is currently, generally referred-to as French Polynesia
Maori themselves are not certain of the exact location, as apparently the information has become lost in the 600-or so years since they arrived here (The joys of a non-written language).
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:51 pm
“OK, remind me again how many south island tribes signed the treaty ?
This gets really interesting because as far as I recall, the south island was “taken by discovery” as it was deemed to be uninhabited when the white fella’s arrived.
The round ballast rocks that were unloaded from Chinese ships to be replaced with Greenstone boulders for the return voyage are a hint of rich past that existed well before Polynesian settlers. I really don’t care what we call the islands – but I do want to know why every single island that has Polynesian settlers has no acknowledged history before the Polynesian settlers. I have no issues with the principle that Polynesian settlers found some islands uninhabited but all of them? Every single one was uninhabited, I don’t think so.
History is written by the survivors.”
Flip Burt
I wonder if Jade is really Greenstone!
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:52 pm
“Bearhunter
“An interesting question.
The exact location of Hawiiki is uncertain, but is generaly believed to be somewhere in the Macquesis Island Group, which is situated roughly North/North East of New Zealand, with Tahiti being the most well-known of the islands in the area, which is currently, generally referred-to as French Polynesia
Maori themselves are not certain of the exact location, as apparently the information has become lost in the 600-or so years since they arrived here (The joys of a non-written language).”
But the exact beach and village Maori left the Cooks to NZ is well known.
All Cook Islanders know where Maori come from.
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:54 pm
wikiriwhis business
The Cook Islands certainly do claim to have been the home of NZ Maori. However the whole thing comes unglued on the issue of drums. The Cook Islanders are prolific bangers of drums yet there is no such concept in NZ Maori. What happened there?
The lack of suitable timbers in NZ is one explanation I have heard, however the legend talks of return voyages so it’s hard to imagine that some drums were not present somewhere when the white fellas arrived.
It’s always possible that the Cook Islands supplied just one Iwi to the melting pot that was pre European NZ. But I doubt it is the home of “NZ Maori”.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:11 pm
Just look at the Maori features, they are from farther North. They look very Chinese in fact. That is why some people theorized that they are from near Taiwan. But that is ridiculous when you consider size and strength differences.
For me, they are the closest to the Hawaiins. Any surfer who has surfed at Raglan or East Cape and been hassled by Maori surfers (not necessarily locals) knows about Da Kline, the bros and their violent localism in Hawaii.
Same size, same strength, same attitude, and skilled at surfing and fighting.
My bet is they were washed down from somewhere near Hawaii in their war canoes in a storm.
Hmmm, lucky us and Moriori eh?
Oh well, Mother Nature cannot please all the time and often delivers disasters.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:21 pm
“The Cook Islands certainly do claim to have been the home of NZ Maori.”
dont tell them that FFS Burt, I dont want to holiday in the ‘Chook Islands ‘
April 23rd, 2009 at 12:55 am
Good to see New Zealand has gotten over that recession it was experiencing and can now expend valuable time and effort on the important stuff like this.
April 23rd, 2009 at 3:28 am
Give the Maoris the North Island why not!!!!?
Those dirty lazy violent annoying shits are never gonna go away. 5 more years of handouts, ya right! South Africa is solved nice and peacefully right, with the “black party” bound to get in.
The English like the South Island. I like the South Island.
Give the North island to the Bungas.
April 23rd, 2009 at 12:11 pm
We live in a democracy, do we not?
Therefore, before any name or symbol is changed, should it not be by popular consent?
I saw recently on an international website a list of countries that included Aotearoa/New Zealand. Ours was the only country with such a schizophrenic name.
When did that happen?
I don’t mind if we change our country’s name – or the islands’ names – to Maori names (and I do like the word Pounamu), but I sure as hell mind it being done without the consent of the people.
I’ll soon be promoting a new flag for New Zealand. Much as I might like it, it wouldn’t be fair to have it imposed on the people by some Flag Board.
Why does the Geographic Board have such antidemocratic powers?
April 23rd, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Because, in 1946, the democratically-elected Parliament of New Zealand decided that in this democracy placenames could be decided by the New Zealand Geographic Board. And the democratically-elected Parliaments elected in 1949, ’51, ’54, ’57, ’60, ’63, ’66, ’69, ’72, ’75, ’78, ’81, ’84, ’87, ’90, ’93, ’96, ’99, 2002, ’05 & ’08 haven’t seen fit to remove that power from them. Representative Deomacracy at its finest
April 23rd, 2009 at 12:40 pm
And if you want to get public consent for the Maori names, I think you’d have more chance if you lost the separate words ‘Te Ika a’ and ‘Te Wai’.
How would Ikamaui and Pounamu work linguistically?
They’d be a much easier sell.
April 23rd, 2009 at 12:48 pm
When picking names we need to carefully consider the history of NZ.
http://www.kilts.co.nz/mhorruairidh.htm
April 23rd, 2009 at 12:50 pm
I think most English speakers meet the Maori language half-way. Some who particularly identify with Maori go further.
Trevor Mallard talked about Mt Egmont/Taranaki. In my experience, most people – consciously or subconsciously – take a bit from each name and now call it Mt Taranaki.