50. The question has very often been asked—Whence came the people who were found inhabiting the islands of New Zealand? and this question has not yet been satisfactorily answered. It is therefore purposed to take up the consideration of this subject, and possibly to place some matters connected with it in a new, or clearer light.
(1.) Are the present New Zealanders autochthones? The commonly received statement—that the whole globe was peopled from one pair, which pair primarily resided in Western Asia; the traditions of the people themselves; and (chiefly) their cultivated plants being exotics, and their only domestic animal not indigenous; and their language radically agreeing with that of other island groups, are the present reasons for disallowing this.
(2.) Were there autochthones? Possibly, or rather, very likely. a. From the fact that no large island like New Zealand, however distant from the nearest land, is uninhabited. b. From the fact that nearly all the numerous islands in the Pacific, though vastly smaller in size, teeming with population. c. From the fact of a remnant at present existing in the Chatham Islands (the nearest land to New Zealand), of a race which is allowed by the present New Zealanders to be truly aboriginal, and before them in occupation. d. From their traditions, and fear of “wild men” in the interior. e. From the allusions, and even direct statement, in their traditionary myths, of their having found inhabitants on their arrival in the country, both at Waitara, on the west coast of the North Island, and at Rotorua, in the interior. But if there were, which appears very probable, they have been destroyed, or become amalgamated with the present race.
(3.) Did the Immigrants come from the nearest land? (Australia, etc.?) No: proved by their being a wholly distinct race, in appearance, civilisation, manners, customs, habits, and language.
(4.) Whence, then, came they? (Before entering on this question, it should be carefully noted that could the island be clearly shown whence they came, such would not really answer the question; it would only remove it a step farther off.) In reply to this—
(i.) Very little can be gathered from their own traditions worthy of any credit; save that, (a.) some arrived hither in canoes; and (b.) that those arrivals were successive. Even these two postulates could scarcely be allowed, were it not for two facts—first, that their only cultivated vegetables were exotics; and, second, that the principal different tribal, or district varieties among the New Zealanders—as seen in Physiology, Language, and Traditions—partly coincide with what at present obtains in some of the Island groups. The use of the nasal sound ng by two-
thirds of the New Zealanders agree with the usage in the Tonga, Samoan, and Hervey Islands; the omission of the h and the substituting instead of a peculiar click, (as done by the Cook's Straits and West Coast New Zealanders) agree with those of Austral Island and Rarotonga; and the dropping of the nasal sound ng by the natives of the Bay of Plenty, and using n instead, agree with those of Marquesan, Society, and Sandwich Islands; while the New Zealand use of the k, agrees with that of the Hervey, and the Friendly Islands.
(ii.) In their traditionary myths, the New Zealanders also say that they came hither from “Hawaiki.” The writer was formerly of opinion, (in 1835–6, which has subsequently been taken up as valid by several others,) that this Hawaiki was identical with the Sandwich Islands, or Hawaii,—the k being dropped according to the rules of their dialect;—but he has long given that up as untenable. (1.) From the utter impossibility of their having come that distance, (65° of latitude), against the prevailing winds in their frail open canoes; and (2.) from the irreconcilable differences which exist in their habits, customs, manufactures, traditions, and religion. By way of illustration, the following may be here briefly mentioned, (bearing in mind, that the New Zealanders, like most other uncivilized people, most pertinaciously adhere to the plans, patterns, and sort of things made by their ancestors);—(a.) all the various kinds of New Zealand canoes are very differently made: (b.) they have no outrigger: (c.) the New Zealanders never used the kawa root, (not-withstanding a very closely allied species of piper grows throughout New Zealand): (d.) nor the bow and arrows: (e.) the New Zealanders invariably carry their burthens on their backs, the Sandwich Islanders on a balance pole over the shoulders: (f.) the New Zealander has no words for swearing, oath, or vow: (g.) the New Zealander never practised circumcision:* (h.) nor had any temples for religious worship: (i.) nor idols; (j.) nor king: (k.) they knew not the names of the numerous chief gods of the Sandwich Island: (l.) their old customs respecting their Chief, etc., do not agree: (m.) their tattooing is different: (n.) they had no “refuge cities” (a most remarkable custom, only found at the Sandwich Islands): and (3.) from there being no vestige of any of their several emigrations from Hawaiki, and of the wars, etc., which occasioned such, (as related by the New Zealander,) to be found in the ancient history of the people of the Sandwich Islands, whose traditions are much more ancient and clear than those of the New Zealanders.
(iii.) Others have supposed the largest island of the Samoan, or Navigator's, group—called by the same name, Sawaii, (the sibilant being used for the aspirate—Sawaii, Hawaii, Hawaiki,) to be the Hawaiki of the New Zealanders. This opinion has been warmly supported by several later writers,† but, with the sole exception of the Samoan group being only half the distance from New Zealand that the Sandwich Islands are, certainly with much less reason than the former. For, in addition to the objections adduced against the Sandwich Islands being the New Zea-
[Footnote] * Vide Cook's Voyages, 4to. Ed., vol. iii, p. 50.
[Footnote] † Erskine's “Journal of a Cruise in the Western Pacific,” p. 103, ed. 1853: et. al. It may be noticed, by the way, that Dr. Thompson, in his elaborate compilation, “Story of New Zealand, London, 1859,” speaks of this view as being peculiarly his own!
land home, or Hawaiki—here, at the Samoan group, they never tattoo their heads and upper part of their bodies, but only from the waist downwards, and that in a wholly different style; the women also are never tattooed; the men, including chiefs of the highest rank, do all the cooking;* their dialect, on the whole, has much less affinity with that of New Zealand; their traditions about the creation of the earth, etc., are widely different; and the kumara, or sweet potato (common at the Sandwich Isles), they have not among them.
(iv.) But even if it were conceded, or proved, that the New Zealanders really came from the Hawaiki of either the Samoan or the Sandwich group—the next question would be, Whence came their ancestors? (Vide infra, par. 53.)
(v.) There is yet another view to be taken of this word Hawaiki, or Hawaii, which at least is not wholly unworthy of notice, viz.—to consider the New Zealand tradition of their emigration thence to New Zealand more as a figurative or allegorical myth than anything really historical. Such is wholly in keeping with all their other traditionary myths, and with the genius of the race; and also with the common legends of all nations. Viewing it thus, Hawaiki, or Hawaii, will no longer mean any particular (if any) island; and may prove to be a portion of a still more ancient myth than that of the fishing-up of the Northern Island of New Zealand by Maui. Williams (L. M.) says, that “one of the Polynesian traditions concerning the creation of the world and of the first peopling of it, was, that after the island of Hawaii was produced by the bursting of an egg, which an immense bird laid upon the sea a man and a woman, with a hog, a dog, and a pair of fowls, arrived in a canoe from the Society Islands, and became the progenitors of the present inhabitants.” And another account, given by Turner, † represents Tangaroa, the great Polynesian Jupiter, as rolling down from heaven two great stones, one of which became the first land, or island of Savaii—(or Hawaii,) in the Samoan group. Very likely it may yet more clearly be seen that this mythical or allegorical Hawaii, or Sawaii, of those two groups, is also the mythical Hawaiki of the New Zealanders—the whole being fragmentary portions of the legend of a flood which are found underlying the myths of all ancient races. By whom, however, the universal greatness of the event (as found in the Biblical record) is generally lessened or lost sight of; while the legend itself is contracted into a matter of insular national and special interest, serving to carry back the forms of every-day life into antediluvian ages. Common proofs of the inventive mind of man ever seeking to understand the why and the wherefore of things around him.
51. Leaving, however, for a while the further consideration of the place whence the immigrant ancestors of the New Zealanders may have come, let the endeavour now be made to ascertain the time when they arrived in New Zealand. Here again, little really valuable, of a positive nature can be gathered from their traditions. The writer very well knows, how cleverly the different tribes of New Zealanders contrive to
[Footnote] * Turner says—“The duties of cooking devolve on the men; and all, even chiefs of the highest rank, consider it no disgrace to assist in the cooking-house.”—Nineteen Years in Polynesia, (p. 196.)
[Footnote] † Nineteen Years in Polynesia, p. 245, ed. 1861.
deduce their descent from some one of those early (mythical) emigrants; although in so doing, they diametrically oppose each other in their early genealogies; while others, finding no means of tacking themselves on to a “parent stem,” cut the matter short by saying their ancestors came from Hawaiki on the water by enchantment in a few hours;—or under water, by diving—or on the back of an albatross, etc., etc.! And the writer also knows, how many late writers and lecturers on this subject, have repeatedly stated their full belief in the historical truth of such traditions! And not only so, but by proceeding to calculate the generations of the New Zealanders, (believing, of course, all their genealogical statements,) have come to the conclusion, that “their dwelling in New Zealand has not been more than 500 years;” scarcely four centuries before Cook, and not three before Tasman discovered them (a.d. 1642)! In reasonably prosecuting this enquiry, a few old truthful witnesses will have to be carefully examined; and although their evidence (from the nature of the case) will scarcely be any other than purely negative; yet, combined, the reasonable proof they will yield of great antiquity may be sufficient to establish its claim for favorable consideration to the intelligent and scientific mind.
(1.) Tradition—uniformly speaks of the Northern Island of New Zealand having been fished up by Maui. How did this peculiar myth arise concerning this one Island? Did the first inhabitants see recent signs of upheaval, which (geologically speaking) are patent to us, especially on the East Coast, and in the Hawke's Bay province? Further: tradition speaks of the vehement struggles of the said, huge earth-fish after having been brought to the surface, (owing to the impiety of the brothers of Maui, who, in his absence, had proceeded to cut up his fish,) which caused the very broken and abrupt appearance of the country:—may this be also considered as indicative of subsequent violent volcanic action, known to the first inhabitants? What necessity was there for such an addition to the Polynesian myth of Maui, seeing either of the countries they had left (Hawaii, or Sawaii), were more broken? Again: the hook, with which Maui had fished up the land, was said to be at Cape Kidnappers, in Hawke's Bay—no doubt from the curved extension of the land at that cape in ancient times, when the present two islets lying off it were joined to the land—but those two islets existed, as now, in Cook's time. And long before that period (owing to the very gradual irruption of the sea there at that clayey cape) the ancestors of the present natives, seeing the “hook” was gone, had removed its locality to Cape Turnagain, which cape also had a similar, though smaller curvature; this, too, has long ago been washed away. May not this be considered as another item in favor of antiquity? Tradition also speaks of many local portions of the North Island having been upheaved, fallen-in, submerged, and deluged — of the old channels of the present rivers having been far off from, and flowing over much higher ground than where they now are; of chasms having opened, and of the escape of the imprisoned monsters (Taniwha or Ngarara) to the sea, and, in some few cases, of their having been killed by some renowned hero of former days. Now in most of these instances alluded to (some of which places the writer has seen and examined) a thousand years would scarcely suffice for their subsequent forests and depth of vegetable humus. Again: the
stone canoes in which those mythical emigrants arrived, scattered on both the East and West Coast, (one being on the crest of a high range, twenty miles from the sea); the footmarks of Rongokako, one of those emigrants, also left in stone at various parts of the East Coast; the several men metamorphosed into large perpendicular stones at Manaia, in Whangarei Harbour, etc., etc., all indicate a long time back in the old night preceding all history; or such conspicuous stones would not have been handed down and narrated by such a shrewd inquisitive race as the New Zealanders. Lastly: the tradition which the writer received in 1837, from an intelligent aged “priest” in the Bay of Plenty, respecting Tuhua, or Mayor Island, there, viz, that anciently the Northern natives obtained their prized greenstone from that island; but, that the guardian-god being vexed covered it with excrementitious substances, and swam away with the fish which produced it to the Middle Island, whence, subsequently all the greenstone was with difficulty obtained.—Now, as the island is an eruptive volcanic mass, this tradition, in more ways than one, points to a time long since past.—Often what is not scientifically correct has in it a deep and pregnant truth of feeling.
(2.) Archœology. In repeated travelling in the North Island, from Cook's Straits to Cape Maria Van Diemen, during more than a quarter of a century, and that by bye-paths long disused, through forests, and over mountain and hilly ranges, the writer has been often astonished at the signs frequently met with, of a very numerous ancient population, who once dwelt in places long since desolate and uninhabited:—Such as the number and extent of their hill forts, cut, levelled, escarped, moated, and fenced, only with immense labour (considering they had no iron tools);—and the number and extent of their ancient cultivations, all long since overgrown; and the enormous mounds of river, lake, and seashells, sometimes clearly revealing the slow accretions through years or centuries, by their accumulations having been made stratum super stratum with intervening layers of vegetable mould and humus—each stratum of shell possessing small fragments of obsidian, which mineral (used by them for cutting their hair, and themselves in lamentation, and also for scraping their finer woodwork) being only found in one or two districts, had been brought from a great distance. He also noticed, and that in more than one or two places, that some of the ancient New Zealanders buried their dead in the earth or sand; skulls having been met with, and skeletons which had been buried, and from which the winds had removed the soil. On enquiry, it was found, that none of the present generation knew aught of the people to whom such bones had belonged; they also expressed no astonishment at them, and always disowned their ever having belonged to their tribe, and which, indeed, their conduct showed. Moreover, the very great number of their jade (greenstone) war implements and ornaments, (found by Cook and others, even at the Bay of Islands and the North Cape,) seem to indicate their antiquity as a race in New Zealand. The great number appears the more remarkable when it is considered that they always endeavoured to hide them securely in time of war, through which great numbers have been lost. Now that stone is only found at one spot in the Middle Island,* difficult of access
[Footnote] * Though found as pebbles on many parts of the West Coast.—Ed.
both by sea and land. It was only obtained thence with great difficulty, increased through the superstitious belief that it was produced by a “fish” under the guardianship of a “god,” to propitiate whom many ceremonies were observed. Further: there is also the known antiquity of many of those prized stone weapons and ornaments which have descended as heir-looms through several generations, and the great length of time necessarily taken in the making of one of them. Again: there is the silent evidence of the mako, or tooth of the long-snouted porpoise, the prized ear ornament of the New Zealanders, many of which are also heir-looms of great antiquity. How did their ancestors obtain these teeth seeing the animal which produces them inhabits the open ocean? The natives say, by occasionally finding the animal driven on shore after a gale. But during the writer's long residence of more than thirty years, always on the sea coast, and his frequent travelling over all the beaches, he has only heard of one of those animals having been found, and that was too small for its teeth to be of any value! What amount of years, then, may it not reasonably have required to obtain all those teeth now left among the natives—exclusive of the large number sold and lost.
(3.) History.—From Tasman and Cook we learn that the natives were very numerous. Tasman, who came suddenly upon them from the South, coasting up the western side of the Middle Island, and who only remained at anchor for a few hours in one of its bays, was visited by eight canoes filled with men, who attacked him, and having killed his quarter-master and four others, they retreated, bearing off one of the bodies. Tasman “immediately left the scene of this bloody transaction; when twenty-two more boats put off from the shore, and advanced towards them.” From a drawing given by Tasman, we find the “boats” he speaks of to be the ancient double canoe, long since out of date. This occurred in 1642: some 280 years (according to our calculators) after the arrival of the first few emigrants in this country! Here, let it be observed, that according to the natives' own legends, those so-called emigrants were not many in number; that they soon fell out among themselves, went to war with each other, and slew several where they had landed in the Bay of Plenty; and that of the remainder, many went inland, and farther north in the North Island, and settled. Yet Tasman found the inhospitable and colder latitudes of the Middle Island, near Cape Farewell, so thickly peopled as to send thirty boats and canoes from one beach, well manned, to the attack. Cook, who had long and repeated interviews with them during his different voyages, and who was associated with scientific and observing men; (although, both from the nature of the country and character of the people, he could only have seen those tribes who lived on the sea coast and near to his anchorages, which anchorages were not many in the vastly more populous Northern Island)—Cook was of opinion, that they were very numerous; so also were the two French navigators, D'Surville and Crozet, who arrived in New Zealand shortly after Cook. But what has ever been of great weight with the writer, as being highly corroborative of the correctness of the opinion formed by the early navigators is, the statements they give (especially Cook) of the innumerable number of canoes, of the number of large seine nets, which they everywhere found in houses
erected purposely for them—of the extent of the kumara or sweet potato cultivations, and of the very many places on the immediate East Coast—particularly between Capes Palliser and Kidnappers, and Capes Rodney and Brett, and Cape Pococke and the North Cape, which then abounded with Pas, (forts and villages), and swarmed with people; but which are now, and have been for many years, wholly uninhabited! All which, it is believed, silently indicates the ancient settlement of the race, especially when their warlike character and habit is also considered.
(4.) Habits, Customs, Manufactures, Ornaments, and Tattooing.—Very many of the habits and customs of the New Zealanders, indeed nearly all, are widely different from those of other Polynesian islanders, though belonging to the same race. So also their manufactures; whether the more useful and durable, as canoes, houses, implements of wood, etc., or the many varied textile ones, for clothing and daily use; all differed, and that greatly. And when their immense variety, with their woven and dyed ornamental patterns, and their skill in manufacturing, is also considered, how long a time would it not require for them to lose all the old knowledge (which they had brought with them) and to gain the new; and also to use it successfully upon entirely new materials? (For not only is the New Zealand flax plant (Phormium) not found in the other islands, but also no like fibrous substitute.)—And that by a people so prone to copy, and so exceedingly tenacious of innovation;—by a people, too, who, according to their own traditions and legends, and the sad experience of the early navigators, were so prone to war and murder. Again: tediously to fashion their war implements of whalebone, and of jade (green or axe-stone), instead of hardwood, was wholly a new thing to them; and these substances were only occasionally to be obtained, and that slowly and with great trouble and labour;—could such a change—such an entire revolution—one, too, almost needless, have taken place save in a very long lapse of time? Moreover, the peculiar carving of all their greenstone breast ornaments (Heitiki) which possess great sameness, and which might be correctly styled national, differs from any other Polynesian carving particularly in the invariably reclined, not erect, head, and in only having three fingers to each hand (which striking peculiarities also invariably obtain in all their old carving); could such a great change in the national taste have taken place in a few generations? Lastly, the tattooing of their chiefs, which entirely differs from all other Polynesian Islanders, and which has certainly not varied in the least during the last 150 years; could such an universal revolution in their old tastes possibly have taken place in the short period which preceded, of 350 years?
(5.) Language.—The negative evidence to be obtained from this source is very important. Language adheres to the soil, when the lips which spoke it are resolved into dust. “Mountains repeat, and rivers murmur, the voices of nations denationalised or extirpated in their own land.” It has already been briefly-shown in what respects the New Zealand dialect differs from other dialects of the great Polynesian language,—as far as relates to the change or substitution of letters; but there are still greater differences observable in the dialects of the two groups—Sandwich and Samoan—(from one of which it has been said the New
Zealanders emigrated hither) and the dialect of New Zealand; of which the great difference in the causative verb in the Sandwich Islands, and of “the distinct and permanent vocabulary of words” used in addressing chiefs can only be here mentioned. It is also noticeable, that the names of “gods” whom the mythical emigrants are said to have consulted before leaving, are not known as such in those islands; and all the names of the emigrants themselves are pure New Zealand words, which do not exist in the dialects of those islands. Their traditions and songs, however ancient, are all very distinct; for although some of the New Zealand myths do possess a few of the names of the numerous Polynesian “gods” or deified heroes, they are all assigned a very different and inferior position and work by the New Zealanders. Could all this have been brought about, in less than a very large number of years? So with the subdialects observed in New Zealand, which agree in their outline characters with others in the Pacific, (as has been already stated,) and which were much more strongly defined formerly than they are now; (mainly owing to the introduction of a written language within the last 30 years, which has caused the chosen one, or two, of the sub-dialects to become both commonly used and dominant;) could those tribes also severally set aside their own many peculiar words, and adopt words which were strange and new (n.z.) in such a short period? or, rather, did they not gradually do so, through the long lapse of ages, and of little intercourse; while they still retained their characteristic tribal pronunciation and manner of speaking?
(6.) Religion.—It is well known that the Sandwich islanders (Hawaii, or Hawaiki,) had an old and costly idolatrous worship, possessing ancient temples, and many ceremonies. It almost seems too ridiculous, momentarily to entertain such a notion, as, that such a ceremonial worship had only originated 400 years before Cook visited them; or, in other words, that it sprang up (de novo) after our emigrants to New Zealand had left. Yet both these positions the believers in the New Zealand immigration myth, from that Hawaiki, must be prepared to support. For, certainly had those emigrants known of it they could not so easily and entirely have cast it off. So again at Savaii (or Hawaiki) of the Samoan Group; their religion was if possible, still farther from anything that either has, or reasonably might have, obtained in New Zealand. For there, “every village had its god, and its small temple consecrated to the deity of the place.” A woman would say, on the birth of her child, “I have got a child for so-and-so, and name the village god.”* In their village temples, too, were objects for veneration. They also daily offered meat-offerings and drink-offerings to their god; and this at home in every house. And their many taboos (tapu),—the sea-pike taboo, the white shark taboo, the cross-stick taboo, the ulcer, the tie-doloreux, and the death taboo, the rat, and the thunder taboo, etc., etc., were all differing widely from anything which has ever obtained in New Zealand.
(7.) The Moa, Dinornis.—Its valuable evidence is purposely omitted, as the writer still holds to his original opinion (published twenty-three years ago,† and drawn both from geological deductions as well as from
[Footnote] * Turner's Nineteen Years in Polynesia, pp. 239, 240.
[Footnote] † In Tasmanian Journal of Natural Science, vol. ii.
history,) in reference to its never having been seen alive by the present race of New Zealanders. For if it had been seen by them, and by them had been gradually killed and extirpated, (as some Europeans have labored to shew,) then no surer evidence could be desired as to the great antiquity of the present race in New Zealand.
(8.) After examining and weighing all this evidence gathered from various sources, the mind is irresistibly driven to accept the only logical conclusion,—that the time of the early or first peopling of New Zealand is one of high antiquity.
52. Further, it is believed, that it will also be satisfactory briefly to consider the first emigrants mentioned in the New Zealand traditionary myths;—the persons and their doings. The names of several canoes are given, also of their crews or leaders;—their marvellous adventures by the way; the numerous things they brought to New Zealand;—and the height of the men, “9 and 11 feet.” Also, that some of them had previously discovered New Zealand, in a voyage of exploration purposely made hither, and having coasted and visited different parts of it, had returned to the mother country and had been the means of others coming to New Zealand to settle; and that many of the canoes, on reaching the land of New Zealand, immediately set about circumnavigating the Northern Island! I etc., etc. In all this mythical rhapsody there is scarcely a grain of truth; and yet some educated Europeans have wholly believed it! The New Zealanders themselves however, never did so. The names of the canoes and of the leaders are nearly all figurative names suitably coined in the New Zealand tongue, and given after the event; several of the latter being also the names of ideal beings in their mythology. They are all said to have come from one place; but it has been shown, and anyone may yet see, that they evidently came from several, as their sub-dialects, still partly extant, clearly show. They are also said to have come by several consecutive migrations; this alone would require a very long time. Their adventures on the way,—their enchantments, battles; and charms (excelling those of Munchausen, or Gulliver), are suited, perhaps, for the region of romance, but ought to have no place in any reasonable enquiry. Among the numerous things said to have been brought by them to New Zealand, were several of the wild New Zealand birds,—such as, the swamp pukeko, the green parroquet, the woodhen, and many others; also the New Zealand rat! and, with the exotic plants the Karaka tree, which last they everywhere planted; but, unfortunately for them, the tree is not found anywhere else; the canoes which brought them are spoken of as being only ordinary canoes, and some even small, yet to contain 140 men! And, while several kinds of food (used by New Zealanders) are spoken of, no mention whatever is made of any of the peculiar edible productions of the islands; or of water, none of the Polynesian islanders having any large water-holding vessels. Some of their leaders are described as leaving in great haste and flying for their lives,—others as being of monstrous size, and able to accomplish anything,—even to run to the top of the mountain Tongariro, or to dive under the island and emerge on the other side, or to tame whales,—nevertheless to be subject to all the common infirmities of smaller and ordinary men.
53. To return: the question put (par. 50, sec. iv.) has not yet been answered:—Whence came the Maori,—the Polynesian race? It is not,
however, the present intention of the writer to go deeply into the subject. Only a few thoughts and excogitations will be here set down.
i. That the race is one, throughout the numerous islands in the Pacific Ocean where the language is spoken. (Vide, par. 49.)
ii. That from its original wide separation into groups, sufficient time must be allowed for the perfect grammatical construction and full development of its leading dialects; the growth of its many and varied habits; customs, and manufactures; and the slow change and product of its various mythologies and traditions.
iii. That notwithstanding their long and sanguinary wars among themselves from time immemorial, prior to their discovery by Europeans, the respective islands were teeming with population.
iv. That while some have supposed the race to have sprung from the Malays, from a very slight physical resemblance, and from the likeness of a few words of their language; there is quite as much, if not a greater, physical resemblance between the race and the people of Madagascar (on the opposite side of the globe), whose language also contains a few words and sentences which are identical.
v. That, with the exception of the Islands of New Zealand, which are the farthest south, the race is almost exclusively found in the easternmost isles and groups of the Pacific; and not in the numerous isles nearest to the Malays.
vi. That it would have been impossible for any regular migration to have ever taken place from the Malays to the Polynesian islands, owing the frailness of their shipping,—and to the prevailing trade winds and equatorial currents being contrary.
vii. That the Malays were found, by Cook, and the earlier navigators, to know the use of iron and other metals, and invariably to chew betel, drink Palm wine (toddy), smoke, cook in earthen pots, live in partitioned houses, and to be strictmonogamists; none of which national habits and customs, nor the knowledge of any metal has been detected among the Polynesians.
viii. That the near resemblance or even identity, of a few (quasi) Malayan words prove really little, when it is considered (1) that those words only obtain among the sea coast natives of Malaya; and (2) that the same words are found more or less in use in the sea coasts of Java, Sumbawa, and the Phillipine and other isles, including even Madagascar. May it not therefore be reasonably enquired, whether those few words might not rather have reached those several Northern Asiatic isles from Polynesia, than vice versa?
ix. That the language spoken by the Polynesian race has no affinity with the Malayan; being in its whole formation and construction of a far more primitive and ancient cast. The structure of the Malayan language is wholly different.
x. That if the origin of the people on some few of the islands (in the lapse of ages) might have arisen from a drift canoe, (which seems next to impossible), exotic edible roots were not at all likely to have been by such means imported; nor the peculiar and ancient Asiatic drink of Palm wine (toddy) to be to them, where the Cocoa-nut is everywhere indigenous, wholly unknown.
xi. That the kumara, or sweet potato, so generally cultivated in the
islands by the Polynesian race, is believed on good grounds to be only indigenous to South America.
xii. That a large migration has ever been traditionally spoken of, as having anciently taken place from Mexico and Central America, (on the breaking up of the Toltec Empire;) and that it is an easy and short voyage, and one not impossible to large canoes, from Central America to several of the nearest Polynesian islands.
xiii. That of all the various dialects to be found among the largely scattered Polynesian race, the New Zealand dialect agrees most with that of the little isolated islet called Easter Island, and next with that of the Sandwich group; which islands are also the nearest of all the inhabited isles to the shores of America.
xiv. That the carving of the Polynesian race, and particularly of the New Zealanders agrees most (as far as is at present known) with that of the ancient inhabitants of Central America, as shown by the late discoveries at Uxmel and Palenque.
xv. That like the ancient inhabitants of Central America the New Zealanders obtained fire by friction; and steeped poisonous kernels of the karaka, etc., to obtain a food, much as those also did the poisonous roots of the Mandioc or Cassava plant.
xvi. That there is incontestable geognostic evidence of a chain or series of active volcanoes surrounding the Pacific Ocean.
xvii. That there are good reasons for believing that very great changes have taken place in the Pacific through volcanic agency.
xviii. That there are also good reasons for believing, geologically and analogically, from what we see in Europe, and also here in New Zealand—that anciently the volcanic focus (or foci) in the Pacific was nearer its centre than it is now.
xix. That there are also reasons for believing that through such agency, a continent, or large continental island, or islands, have been wholly, or partially, rent, and sub-merged in the Pacific Ocean.
xx. That it is a highly interesting fact, and one that is increasing in importance every day, that the large majority of animals and plants of the whole island region inhabited by this great race, while more or less allied in themselves, are peculiar to this region.
xxi. That in New Zealand, and in several other islands of the Pacific, there are species of European, African, and American plants, identical with the plants of those countries, but which have not been taken to the Pacific islands by the agency of man.
xxii. That there are living remnants of an apparently earlier creation; both animal and vegetable, in the Pacific isles and seas.
xxiii. That the Polynesian race of man may be a fixed variety of the genus homo.
xxiv. That there seems to be just the same kind of difficulty attending this question as attends that of the geographical distribution of animals and plants among the Polynesian islands.
xxv. That the Polynesian variety (stirps) of the genus homo, may be an earlier one than the Caucasian or European; and from its creation peculiar to its own (now) insular region.
xxvi. That it is believed, that while the fair Polynesian race everywhere exhibits signs of great antiquity, it also bears unequivocal symp-
toms of great and rapid decadence, or universal deterioration and decline.
xxvii. That the origin of the Polynesian race is a problem that has yet to be solved; and it is believed (having firm faith in the vocation of Man, and his power to fulfil it) that it will be solved.