Maori people, like so many other races, could never form themselves into a nation, but were ever split up into many tribes, who waged war against each other for long centuries.

The Maori were endogamous in regard to the tribe and the sub-tribe or clan (hapu), and also to some extent in regard to the sub-hapu—i.e., the gens, or family group. Not that marriages did not take place as between members of one hapu and those of another, or even between those of one tribe and another. Such marriages did occur, the latter, however, much more rarely than the former. Still, it was considered desirable to marry within the hapu, or clan, for social and political reasons. Marriages between members of one tribe and those of another were generally of a political nature, as to cement a peace-making. We are speaking of pre-European days now, for latterly extra-tribal marriages have become more frequent.

As to marriages between members of the same sub-hapu (gens, family group), it would depend entirely on how many generations that group was composed of—i.e., in regard to the number of generations of descent of the members thereof from a common ancestor. The custom among the Tuhoe Tribe is simply this: the members of the third generation of two divergent lines from a common ancestor may intermarry. Observe:—

Here we have Tawa and Te Pou-whenua, both sons of Rangi-ka-whetui. Tawa had Tanira, who had Hapine. Te Pou-whenua had Te Akiu and Toka-mauku. Te Akiu had Rangi-tere-mauri. Toka-mauku had Te Waihuka and Te Amo. The latter had Whare-pouri, who had Kuini. Now, when Hapine and Rangi wished to marry an objection was raised by some members of the tribe on the ground that the connection was too close and that the marriage would be an incestuous one. This objection was overruled—in the first place because it was shown that Hapine and Rangi were of the third generation from a common ancestor—viz., Rangi kawhetui; and, secondly, because the marriage was arranged in due form (he mea ata whakamoe) by the parents of both and by the tribe. Hence no further opposition was made, and the

couple were duly married. Nor are they ever reproached with having transgressed tribal custom. But Tanira would not be allowed to marry Te Akiu, because they are only the second generation from a common ancester. Such a union would be looked upon as being incestuous. Nor could Rangi marry Te Waihuka, for the same reason. Te Amo might marry Hapine, though possibly some of the tribe might have objected, as in the case of Rangi; but such opposition would break down if the couple persisted, as shown above. The natives say that it is only among dogs that near relations have connection with each other.

Half sisters and brothers are not allowed to marry, they being looked upon as are full brothers and sisters, a relic possibly of a system of maternal filiation of remote times.

Now we will show an incestuous marriage which took place in this district a few years ago, and which was bitterly condemned by the tribe:—

Here Towai married Pepi, and both are of the second generation from a common ancestor—viz., Te Ngaro. These two are first cousins, but according to the consanguineous nomenclature of the Maori they are termed “brother” and “sister” to each other. Hence this union is looked upon as incestuous, and is spoken of as “He ngau whiore, he whakahouhou” (“It is incestuous, it is disgusting”). Disparaging allusions to the above couple are often heard. Such unions are infrequent, and, it would appear, universally condemned.

It will thus be seen that the Maori were an endogamous people, and are so still to a great extent. Doubtless it was deemed desirable to keep as many fighting-men within the clan-limits as possible in the warlike days of old.

In regard to exogamous marriages, the following proverbial saying explains the situation: “Te inati o Mawakeroa” is used to denote that when a woman marries into another tribe or clan she and her mana are lost to her people and clan. She goes to live with her husband, and returns no more. But a son dwells with us, and we have the advantage of his mana (prestige, &c.), strength, knowledge, and so on; a son remains with his people, not so a daughter.

Many statements met with in various ethnographical works concerning the customs of primitive peoples and

others are often misleading when we apply them to a race whose customs are known to us. Too much is taken for granted; many assertions are too general. In “The Primitive Family,” by C. N. Starcke, we read, “The tribe is endogamous, but the clan or sub-tribe is exogamous—i.e., a person must always marry out of the sub-tribe.” This statement, as we have seen, does not apply to the Maori of New Zealand. The same writer says, “No people are exogamous as a tribe, only clans or sub-tribes are so.” It is quite certain that no Maori tribe was exogamous; neither were the sub-tribes.

As a consequence of the Maori recognition of both agnatic and uterine filiation, it follows that property is inherited through both parents, as also is rank and prestige. Property inherited consists principally of land interests. Hence it follows that the native claims to land are often most intricate and difficult to adjudicate upon, as our Native Land Court Judges know fall well. The children born of exogamous marriages were entitled to an interest in the lands of both parents, providing that such lands were occupied by them. In such cases it is the custom to live for some time at one place, cultivating food there, and utilising the various natural products of the land, and then to go and live on other lands wherein the person is interested. Thus both claims are kept up, according to Maori custom.

One kind of exogamous marriage among the Maori was the result of their frequent intertribal wars, in which many of the conquered people were enslaved. It was by no means uncommon for a native, even the chiefs, to marry a slave wife, and the children of such an union would inherit their father's rank and property. They would continue to live as members of their father's tribe, by whom they would be better treated and more honoured than they would be by their mother's tribe should they return to it; for on that side the degrading stigma of slavery would lie upon them—there were, in fact, dead to the mother's tribe.

When the Tuhoe Tribe expelled Ngati-manawa from Te Whaiti that stricken people took refuge with the Kahungunu Tribe, to whom they paid a tribute of preserved birds, &c., for being allowed to dwell in those parts. However, they got into trouble with one tribal section of their overlords, and were in sore straits, when a Tuhoe chief went and brought the remnant away to Rua-tahuna. Here many of Tuhoe wished to slay them, but several chiefs of Tuhoe, in order to save the lives of the fugitives, gave some of them women of the Tuhoe Tribe as wives. Hence the refugees were safe, and through those women are the Tuhoe and Ngati-manawa Tribes connected.

Andrew Lang, in his “Custom and Myth,” says, “On