explicit sentences, coming from so great an authority, sufficiently excuse me for having thought and written in a similar strain.

Moreover, I do not think Mr. Colenso justified in treating so severely my modest enquiry. It appears to me that in opening this very question of the use of the bow and arrow by the Maori, I am likely to be of more service in settling the vexed question of the original habitat than the pages of speculative theory before now given to us. One ounce of fact is worth more than a pound of theory. Following out such particular questions as the use of the bow or other warlike implement, the construction of language, the mode of sepulture, or other habits and customs of any savage race, are the ounces of fact, and Mr. Colenso himself admits the incompleteness of his own essay, to which I referred in my first paper, upon the particular ounce, the use of the bow and arrow. In causing him to explain his rather loose sentence, touching the manner in which the Maoris projected their fiery-headed darts when attacking a pa (a similar custom prevails in Fiji), I think I have been of service.

I am sorry also to point out that Mr. Colenso has much disappointed me by the use of the word “ancient” in the heading of his paper. While respecting him as one of the chief authorities in New Zealand upon Maori manners and customs, I still think that he has not been sufficiently particular in his use of terms. What does he mean by the word ancient? Surely not the New Zealander referred to by Professor Owen, who “upon landing found only huge kinds of birds incapable of flight.” The whole line of his argument tends to observations made by Captain Cook and later authorities. For all any commentator can say or prove, the true ancient New Zealander might have brought the bow and arrow with him, but finding it of little service, and having little inclination to use it in play, soon abandoned its use and manufacture. (This is not the only thing the modern Maori has forgotten. He appears also to have forgotten the existence of the Moa, and thought its bones those belonging to a great eagle, while we are pretty well assured that the ancient Maori feasted upon it.) Yet this reasonable supposition could never be entertained, for its mere consideration would cut the ground from beneath the feet of the speculators. They would have to admit the likelihood of the truth of the traditions of the various migrations and disembarkations from the different canoes, together with the similarity of language to that of Tahiti, and other habits and customs similar to those of the South Sea Island people, and that the Maori actually did come to New Zealand from some one of these islands. The fashion has become not to admit this sensible deduction, but to surround the origin of the Maori in mystery, if not almost to exalt him into the position of a separate and distinct race. Unfortunately for such reasoners, their argu-

ments are so loose that they hardly bear criticism. They neither induce nor deduce anything, but weakly mix both lines of argument. Broadly, I, with others, think and assert that the Maori originally came from some one of the South Sea Islands, and support the assertion by deductive reasoning; pointing, in proof, to the traditions, similarity of language, etc., etc. The only other course open is to oppose the assertion, and reason inductively fact by fact to any given point, or at least to show that my facts do not support the original supposition. The speculators adopt neither course, and Mr. Colenso contents himself with asking, “Where did Mr. Phillips get the idea that the bow and arrow was the familiar weapon of the Maori ancestry?” It will be quite time to ask such a question when Mr. Colenso is prepared to show that the original deduction (the migration) is erroneous.^*

I am also surprised at the following sentence contained in Mr. Colenso's paper (p. 110):—“My own testimony is this (the same indeed as that of Cook and others) that the New Zealander never knew the use of the bow and arrow, nor of the sling proper (the italics are his own), as used, for instance, by the natives of Tahiti.” Such a sentence, without a shadow of proof, coming from so great an authority is remarkable. I am quite convinced that Captain Cook would never have so committed himself: while I am fully prepared to admit that the modern Maori—let us say, since the time of Tasman—appeared to know nothing of the bow and arrow, I cannot, nor do I think any one else will, agree in saying that the ancient New Zealander, the immediate descendant of one of the partakers in the migration to which tradition so definitely points, was also in a similar state of ignorance. Indeed I am inclined to take quite the opposite view, and say that the New Zealander did once know the use of the bow and arrow, and I shall endeavour to prove so grave a statement. That proof will be as follows:—Polynesia may be roughly divided into East and West. The Western tribes (Papuan and Malay) used and still use the bow and arrow as a weapon of war. The Eastern tribes (Malay) used and still use it either sacredly or in sport. The Maoris evidently came from the East. On landing they found little use for their sportive weapon, the remembrance of which perhaps, and not the weapon itself, they alone brought with them. They consequently soon abandoned its manufacture. In their original home they had never been accustomed to see the bow and arrow used, except sacredly or in sport. A few tribes, in shallow waters, upon coral reefs, used and still use the bow and arrow for shooting fish, but there were no coral reefs, with like advantages, to be found in New Zealand. I am, therefore, entitled to consider that the ancient New Zealander once knew the use of a sacred and sportive weapon, the remembrance of which, the circumstances attending a new

domicile, and the physical features and animal life of a new country, induced him to forget. It will doubtless surprise the speculators above referred to to learn that this very forgetfulness, as a deductive argument, is only further proof of the soundness of the original deduction.

Moreover, Mr. Colenso, in his reference to Dr. Forster's remarks^* upon the use of the bow and arrow by the Tanna people, is likely to mislead the incautious reader. The Island of Tanna forms one of the New Hebrides group, lying slightly to the westward of the longitude of New Zealand, and about 1600 miles immediately to the northward. Its inhabitants are a mixed race (Papuan and Malayan). As I have already said the bow is a familiar weapon of war among the Papuans, let no one suppose for a moment that the Maoris came from any of their islands. The ordinary course of the trade winds and great storms effectually prevents any such means of communication. Dr. Forster's remarks are, therefore, quite inappropriate. So also with regard to the natives of New Caledonia. The trade winds blow direct from a little to the north of New Zealand towards New Caledonia, nine months out of the year, the rest of the year being the hurricane season. (Sydney sailing vessels, in order to reach New Caledonia, have first to pick up the longitude of New Zealand). Now the general feature of the South Sea Island canoe is to run before the wind, though an oblique course can be steered by keeping as close to the wind's eye as the sailing properties of the particular craft allow. It would have been almost an impossible task to tack down to New Zealand from Tanna or New Caledonia. Both of these examples are therefore quite beside the question at issue. Tanna must not be confused with Tonga, for Tonga and the Tongese occupy quite a different position, and a north-easter might easily have sent a canoe load of warriors down to the Kermadec Islands, and so on to New Zealand.^†

I desire also to point out that the heading of my paper contains the words “peculiar method of propulsion.” This peculiarity was the one important feature of the paper, and sufficient attention has hardly been given to it. Whether the Maori knew or did not know the use of the bow was quite secondary to the chief question—peculiarity of propulsion. I have enquired of old natives in the Wairarapa concerning the matter, and shown them the arrow and whip. While expressing ignorance of the former, they readily applied the whip to a raupo stick to cast it in sport. As I know of no similar method of propulsion existing among civilized nations, I think we should all feel favoured by Mr. Colenso more carefully enquiring into its origin.

With regard to the use of the bow and arrow among other savage nations, I gather that it is or has been used as follows:—And first, with regard to

Polynesia. I have before stated that the Eastern Polynesians make but little use of the weapon, while the Western Polynesians always use it as a weapon of war. This difference is readily accounted for if we turn to the various tribes inhabiting the Malay Islands, the original habitat of all the Polynesian islanders. There are four great races in Malaysia possessing various degrees of civilization and great difference of language, and three or four savage races. The first are the Malay proper (inhabiting the Malay peninsula, and the coast regions of Borneo and Sumatra); the Javanese; the Bugis; and the Talagese. The savage races comprise the Dyaks (wild tribes of Borneo), Battaks, Jakuns, and the aborigines of Northern Celebes, Sula Island, and part of Bouru. These various peoples have, at different times, migrated, or been driven to migrate, and naturally carried their different customs with them. Some used the bow and arrow sacredly or in sport, some as a weapon of war, and some the poisoned arrow. Western Polynesia has evidently been peopled by the wild Malay tribes, or Papuans, who use the war or poisoned arrow; while Eastern Polynesia has evidently been peopled by the long-haired, more civilized, Malayans, who were not so savage and warlike.

With reference to the statement that archery was a sacred game:—Mr. Ellis, in his Polynesian Researches^* gives the following account of the matter as observed in Tahiti:—

“The te-a, or archery, was also a sacred game, more so perhaps than any other. The bows, arrows, quiver and cloth in which they were usually kept together with the dresses worn by the archers, were all sacred, and under the especial care of persons regularly appointed to keep them. It was usually practised as a most honourable recreation between the residents of a place and their guests. The sport was generally followed either at the foot of a mountain or on the sea-shore. My house in the valley of Haamene, at Huahine, stood very near an ancient rahi te-a—place of archery. Before commencing the game, the parties repaired to the marae, and performed several ceremonies; after which they put on the archer's dress, and proceeded to the place appointed. They did not shoot at a mark; it was therefore only a trial of strength. In the place to which they shot the arrows two small white flags were displayed, between which the arrows were directed. The bows were made of the light, tough wood of the purau; and were, when unstrung, perfectly straight, about five feet long; an inch, or an inch and a quarter, in diameter in the centre, but smaller at the ends. They were neatly polished, and sometimes ornamented with finely braided human hair, or cinet of the fibres of the cocoanut husk, wound round the ends of the bow in alternate rings. The string was of romaha, or native flax; the arrows were made of

small bamboo reeds, exceedingly light and durable. They were pointed with a piece of aito, or iron-wood, but were not barbed. Their arrows were not feathered; but in order to their being firmly held while the string was drawn, the lower end was covered with a resinous gum from the bread-fruit tree. The length of the arrows varied from two feet six inches to three feet. The spot from which they were shot was considered sacred; there was one of these within my garden at Huahine. It was a stone pile, about three or four feet high, of a triangular form, one side of the angle being convex. When the preparations were completed, the archer ascended this platform, and, kneeling on one knee, drew the string of the bow with the right hand, till the head of the arrow touched the centre of the bow, when it was discharged with great force. It was an effort of much strength, in this position, to draw the bowstring so far. The line often broke, and the bow fell from the archer's hand when the arrow was discharged. The distance to which it was shot, though various, was frequently 300 yards. A number of men, from three to twelve, with small white flags in their hands, were stationed to watch the arrows in their fall. When those of one party went farther than those of the other they waved their flags as a signal to those below. When they fell short, they held down their flags, but lifted up their foot, exclaiming, ua pau, beaten.

“This was a sport in the highest esteem, the king and chiefs usually attending to witness the exercise. As soon as the game was finished, the bow, with the quiver of arrows, was delivered to the charge of a proper person; the archers repaired to the marae, and were obliged to exchange their dress and bathe their persons before they could take any refreshment, or even enter their dwellings. It is astonishing to notice how intimately their system of religion was interwoven with every pursuit of their lives. Their wars, their labours, and their amusements, were all under the control of their gods.” After describing the quiver, Ellis continues as follows:—“The bow and arrow were never used by the Society Islanders excepting in their amusements; hence perhaps their arrows, though pointed, were not barbed, and they did not shoot at a mark. In throwing the spear, and the stone from the sling, both of which they used in battle, they were accustomed to set up a mark, and practised that they might throw with precision as well as force. In the Sandwich Islands they are used also as an amusement, especially in shooting rats, but are not included in their accoutrements for battle; while in the Friendly Islands (Tonga) the bow was not only employed on occasions of festivity, but also used in war; this, however, may have arisen from their proximity to the Feejee Islands, where it is a general weapon. In the Society and Sandwich Islands it is now altogether laid aside, in consequence of its con-

nection with their former idolatry.” (Mr. Ellis' knowledge of Tonga was very slight.)

According to Williams,^* the bow does not appear to have been used by the Samoans in their numerous battles, only the sling, club, and jagged spear.

In Fiji “the bow is sometimes used by women in hard sieges. Fiery arrows are occasionally employed to burn a place into submission. The sling is wielded by powerful hands. I saw a musket which had been struck by a sling-stone. The barrel was considerably indented, and bent nearly half an inch in its length. Another weapon much used, is the missile club, which is worn, stuck in the girdle, sometimes in pairs, like pistols. It resembles the induku of the Kaffirs, a short stick with a large knob at one end, either plain or ornamented. This is hurled with great precision, and used formerly to be the favourite implement of assassination.”^††

Besides the extracts from Cook's Journal, already given by Mr. Colenso, I think it proper to add the following. Referring to the attack by the New Guinea people, in his first voyage, Cook states:—“As they ran towards us the foremost threw something out of his hand, which flew on one side of him, and burnt exactly like gunpowder, but made no report; the other two instantly threw their lances.” A little further on Cook continues:—“All this while they were shouting defiance, and letting off their fires by four or five at a time. What these fires were, or for what purpose intended, we could not imagine; those who discharged them had in their hands a short piece of stick, possibly a hollow cane, which they swung sideways from them, and we immediately saw fire and smoke, exactly resembling those of a musket, and of no longer duration. The deception was so great that the people on board thought they had firearms.”

In Eastern Polynesia, Cook makes but slight mention of the bow and arrow. On arriving at the Marquesas Islands he observed “a heap of stones in the bow of each canoe, and every man had a sling tied round his hand.”

The conduct and aspect of the people of Savage Island caused Cook to give it that name. They threw stones and spears. No mention of the bow and arrow. At Mallicollo (New Hebrides) Cook was fired at by the natives with poisoned arrows. At Erromanga he noticed that most of the people were armed with bows and arrows. These people also threw darts and stones. The people of Tanna were all armed with the bow and arrow, darts, spears, slings, and stones. In the attack, when Cook himself fell, at Karakakora Bay, Owyhee, a dagger (pahooa) was the weapon which caused death, and stones the principal instruments of attack. No mention is made of the bow and arrow by Captain King, Cook's coadjutor.^‡

Hardly any reference is made to the bow by Messrs. Tyerman and Bennett; yet a striking fact is alluded to by them. In observing a conversation between the natives of Tahiti, whom they took with them to the Sandwich Islands, and these latter people, they remark “that the dialects of both nations are so nearly akin that the natives can converse very well with one another.”^* In the Island of Silo (qy. Sooloo), Malaysia, Messrs. Tyerman and Bennett record having noticed the following amusement:—^† “The girls, who had hitherto been engaged in dancing, now retired, and another company made their appearance dressed like the former (peculiar dresses). When they were all seated, an old woman entered and laid down at the feet of each, an instrument resembling a bow, with an arrow on the string, about two feet long, lacquered red and decorated with gold. The dancers soon afterwards rose, and went through all the evolutions of the others, holding these bows in their hands, which added exceedingly to the beauty and picturesque effect of their groups and attitudes.”

The Rev. J. Turner, speaking of arrows, observes in his illustrations of Scripture, “Arrows … the poison whereof,” etc.—Job vi. 4:—“Arrows, so often referred to in Scripture, are still in use in the South Seas, principally where firearms have not been introduced. They are made of a piece of reed, three or four feet long, pointed or barbed, with a bit of hard wood. In the New Hebrides we find them pointed with a piece of human bone, and sometimes dipped in poisonous mixtures from the bush.”^‡ As a general rule the people of Western Polynesia use poisoned arrows.^§

In Asia the bow and arrow is used by the Samoiedes, a people resembling the American Indians, and inhabiting the great Siberian promontory, ending in Cape North; the Khalkas, the most important tribe of the Eastern Mongols; the Buriäts and Yakuts (Siberians); the Siamese, who use powerful cross-bows and poisoned arrows for big game; the Andaman islanders; the Dyaks (Malay), who also use poisoned arrows.

I may here be allowed to refer to the use of the sumpitan. The sumpitan is a curious arrow-adaptation. The arrow is blown from a pipe seven to eight feet long. The Kayans (Dyaks) carry the arrows in a bamboo case, hung at the side, and at the bottom of this quiver is the poison of the upas. The arrow is a thin piece of wood, sharp-pointed, and inserted in a socket, made of the pith of a tree, which fits the tube of the blow-pipe. Beyond a distance of twenty yards they do not shoot with certainty, from the lightness of the arrow. On a calm day the utmost range may be a hundred yards.^|

In Crawford's “Indian Archipelago” occurs the following passage:—^* “Among the savages of all nations we find the use of the club, the sling, and the bow and arrow, the first and universal weapons of all mankind.^† To these the Indian islanders add the tube for discharging arrows, which are sometimes poisoned with a prepared vegetable juice. The Balinese are the only tribe, in any degree civilized, which retains the general use of this practice. The more powerful nations have long since given it up, we may presume rather from an experience of its inefficacy, than from any conviction of the immorality or baseness of the practice. The Javanese historians, in rendering an account of a war conducted by the Sultan of Mataram, against the people of Bali and Blamlangan, as long ago as the year 1639, mention the use of poisoned arrows on the part of the former, as an extraordinary circumstance new to their countrymen, and which excited at first some alarm. In the use of the bow and arrow, and the sling, I do not discover that the Indian islanders have acquired any extraordinary dexterity. The Javanese are extremely fond of the exercise of the bow and arrow as an amusement (sitting, not standing, when drawing the bow), but are anything but skilful in the use of it, and seldom succeed in throwing the arrow above a dozen yards. In the attack upon the palace of the Sultan of Java, in 1812, the Javanese threw stones from slings in great numbers, but without inflicting a serious wound, or even dangerous contusion, in the period of two days. The knowledge of iron must soon have in a great measure suspended the use of these less perfect weapons, and given rise to that of the spear and kris. These may be justly styled the favourite weapons of the Indian islanders.” That arrows were once freely used, is shown in the romances founded by the Javanese on Hindu story or mythology.^‡

In Africa the bow is used by the Nubians—whose women twist the hair into the numberless tiny plaits commonly seen among the Western Pacific islanders—the Hottentots or Bushmen who use the barbed and poisoned arrow, and other tribes, authorities for whose names I have not consulted. Livingstone, in one of his works,^§ gives the following:—“Poisoned arrows are made in two pieces. An iron barb is firmly fastened to one end of a small wand of wood, ten inches or a foot long, the other end of which, fined down to a long point, is nicely fitted, though not otherwise secured, in the hollow of the reed, which forms the arrow-shaft. The wood, immediately below the head, is smeared with the poison. When the arrrow is shot into an animal the reed either falls to the ground at once,

or is very soon brushed off by the bushes; but the iron barb and poisoned upper part of the wood remain in the wound. The poison used here, and called kombi, is obtained from a species of Strophenthus, and is very virulent.” “Another kind of poison was met with on Lake Nyassa which was said to be used exclusively for killing men. It was put on small wooden arrowheads and carefully protected by a piece of maize leaf tied round it.” (The New Hebrideans wrap a piece of banana or other leaf round the heads of their poisoned arrows.) Further on (p. 556) Livingstone continues:—“A bow is in use in the lower end of Lake Nyassa, but is more common in the Maravi country, from six to eight inches broad, which is intended to be used as a shield as well as a bow.”

To what extent the bow was used in Madagascar, I cannot say, authorities being very slight. I shall be glad if any of my hearers can inform me. It is an interesting question, “the Malagese (people of Madagascar) being a Malay people following Malay customs, some of them possessing Malay eyes and hair and features, and all of them speaking a Malay tongue at the present hour.”^*

In South America the bow is used by the Antis Indians inhabiting the Bolivian Andes, who use the three-pronged arrow for fishing, like many tribes in the South Seas; the Pecheray Indians, inhabiting both shores of the Straits of Magellan; the Tierra del Fuegians, whose bows and arrows were much admired by Cook; the Lenguas, a remnant of a great Indian nation; the Tobas, and other neighbouring tribes of the great Desert, who pierce the lobe of the ear and extend the orifice to an immense size for purposes of ornament, like numerous South Sea tribes under the equator, a custom which the Maoris still follow, (many black nations of the Nile pierce the lower lip for a similar purpose, and the Zambesi negroes pierce and extend the upper lip); the Payaguas, the warlike neighbours of the Paraguayan Republic; and I believe also the Botocudos of Brazil, who pierce both ear and lip, and enlarge each orifice. The tribes of Indians dwelling near the Amazon were also, I believe, accustomed to use the blowgun and poisoned arrows for killing game, exactly similar to those used in Malaysia. The tube was about ten feet in length, and the arrow fifteen to eighteen inches.

Generally by the North American Indians, who found great use for the bow for all purposes of war and chase. The Iroquois, Sioux, Commanche, and Crow Indians, all used this weapon, and the Indians as far north as Queen Charlotte Sound.

I can find no mention of its use among the Esquimaux, one of the most widely-spread nations of the world, inhabiting a coast-line of over five

probable. From my knowledge of the South Seas, I have often been inclined to consider that the Maoris, Tongese, Samoans, Rarotongans, and Hervey Islanders are all sprung from the same tribe, and that their islands were originally peopled from Tahiti. Often indeed, even now, Tahitian canoes are driven a three weeks' journey to the westward, or westward and southward, the people, happening to be in them, living upon a few cocoanuts as long as such a supply lasted. Also, that Tahiti itself may have been peopled by a migration from the Sandwich Islands, unless indeed these two groups of islands were peopled at one and the same time by a migrating tribe from the parent Malay country. It is, however, a strange circumstance, that nearly all these islanders claim some acquaintance with Hawii, the principal island of the Sandwich, group, the Savii (=Tharii) of Samoa being almost similar in pronunciation, and the Hauraki of New Zealand being a derivative. The Hawaiian mythos pervades the different groups, especially, as I have before said, the deeds of the great god Maui. I might indeed go further, and say that the natives of all the islands of Eastern Polynesia are sprung from the same origin, and in support of this statement I attach a comparative view of the numerals of the different dialects that I have taken from a table compiled by the Rev. G. Turner, LL.D., to which I refer my hearers:—^*

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

The reason that the numerals of the Union Group (Bowditch Island) happen to be so exactly like those of Samoa, arises, I believe, from the fact that Samoans colonized the group. The same reasoning applies to Savage Island and Tonga. The only other islanders in the Pacific whose numerals