Talk:Hawaiki

Savai'i

There are some grounds for believing that Savai'i may be the original Hawaiki. The Proto-Polynesian form can reasonably be assumed to have been *Sawaiki. According to a series on Hawaiki that aired some time ago on Māori Television, there is a Sawaiki in Fiji. I have been unable to find any other references. If there is such a place, it can reasonably be assumed to be the original. It would be useful to know if the people of Tonga and Niue had the name in their traditions. If not, this would point more definitely to Savai'i in Samoa as the original Hawaiki.

This seems to fit the pattern of Polynesian expansion. It would be interesting to know more about the Tongan hou'eiki; was there a settlement/invasion by Samoan/Savai'ian nobility? If so, it makes a more plausible scenario than to assume that Hawaiki in general is derived from the Polynesian nobility. Hawaiki the otherworld has no unequivocal connection with nobility only, and Polynesian society was stratified enough to expect that it would if there was any genetic relationship. BUT a lot of Polynesians would have preserved oral traditions of their kind originating in Samoa say around 800ish (Hawaiians preserved clear oral memory of historic events for nearly 1000 years). Dysmorodrepanis 22:51, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

It is likely that Eastern Polynesians applied the name successively to the most recent homeland left behind. For the Māori of New Zealand, this would be in the area of the Cook Islands (the immediate departure point) or Tahiti. I understand that the Moriori people of the Chatham Islands used the name Hawaiki to refer to the New Zealand mainland.—Copey 2 13:29, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Have you tried the journals Archeology in Oceania, Oceanic Linguistics and Pacific Science? They should hold papers you will find useful. Dysmorodrepanis 22:51, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Underworld

It is likely that many of the references in the Polynesian traditions have been misread as talking about a 'mythical homeland' when they were actually referring to the Underworld. In many parts of Eastern Polynesia, Avaiki/Havaiki/Hawaiki refers to the underworld. That is true also in some Māori stories - we think when we read them now that Hawaiki means 'ancestral homeland' but reading it as 'the underworld' can make more sense. S. Percy Smith in particular loved to reinterpret the old stories to fit his theories, and once it gets into print, there's no stopping its spread. He did a lot of work in the Cook Islands as well as in NZ and his reinterpretations have made their way into the popular understanding in both places. Witness the monument on Rarotonga to the place where the seven canoes of the (now debunked) Great Fleet left from, as if it was something that was actually recorded in the genuine Cook Islands traditions! It wasn't there until S P Smith made it up Kahuroa 10:20, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Only thing is, Tregear was writing 100 years ago and his use of the word "underworld" may have reflected a Christian worldview. Is there perhaps a more neutral term to reflect that concept of "underworld"? Or, is it possible to define what "underworld" exactly means? I associate it with Hell which is a Christian/Euro conceptualization. Mona-Lynn 20:15, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't have those associations. Orbell uses the term underworld, so its not just Tregear. I think the Mangaian traditions are pretty clear about what Avaiki is. And there will always be trouble finding English translations for Polynesian concepts so you'll never please anyone. Other problematic words are Heaven, Paradise etc. I like to let the stories speak for themselves - eg in the Māui stories he flies down to where his father lives. His mother pulls up a clump of rushes and enters downwards. BTW I'm not saying Hawaiki is not a mythical homeland - just that it might not always mean that Kahuroa 00:09, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

PS - The good thing about Tregear is that he does give his sources so quite often you can check what the terms were in the original languages. Also he just predates the S Percy Smith crap and that can be a help. BTW Anything from Mangaia is probably from Gill originally - *W.W. Gill, Myths and Songs of the South Pacific (Henry S. King: London), 1876. Kahuroa 09:43, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Is there a distinction between Hawaiki the ancestral homeland, and Hawaiki the dwelling of departed spirits? I always thought that the spirits departed from Te Reinga and returned over the Ocean to the land of their ancestors.

Underworld isn't really part of a Christian world view. Its a term sometimes used to describe the after-life concepts of other religions, especially the older paganisms of Europe and the Mediterranean area. In the last century or so it has also been applied to the Jewish concept of She' ol.—Copey 2 06:43, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Distinctions, destinations of the dead depend on which tradition/story/legend/myth/storyteller you are looking at. You can only say 'in this story by this person of this tribe, Hawaiki seems to be X'. In another story by the same person, Hawaiki might be Y. Hawaiki could have been both homeland AND the dwelling of the spirits - or neither - it depends - those two states are not necessarily mutually exclusive anyway. Oral traditions work they way they work and consistency of definition across stories was not important to the purposes the stories served - it was usually irrelevant. It wasn't like there was a textbook that storytellers went by. Kahuroa 07:26, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

"Land of the Ancestors"; compare "mainland"/"motherland", Alchera in other cultures. Mythical place of origin, of course it also makes a good abode for spirits.

Or "guinee" in Voodoo, which seems to much parallel Hawaiki in cultural/religious role, but preserves a clear indication of its origin. Dysmorodrepanis 22:51, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

'Avaiki in the Cook Islands refers to both "the underworld" and "ancestral homeland". I'll get a reference.

Maori rahi 04:39, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Pseudohistory

Deleted the following sentence:

Mythologgy

Some pseudo-historical theories connect Hawaiki with the lost Pacific Ocean continent of Mu

It doesn't say which theories, in what way the two are connected, and in any event implies (through the use of the label "pseudohistorical" that the theories aren't reliable or credible anyway. In otherwords, utterly useless non-information! ElectricRay 18:29, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

• Wikipedia is not paper. There is plenty of room for trivia. --JW1805 (Talk) 03:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

This is not an article about trivia. Its supposed to be about Hawaiki. Not about lost continents. Kahuroa 04:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Kahuroa. I think Wikipedia has way too much trivia, which is peripheral to the actual thing in question. Mona-Lynn 03:01, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Needless to say, I agree wuith Kahuroa and Mona-Lynn. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia. It should dispense with trivia in all its manifestations.ElectricRay 21:50, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Pulotu and Hawaiki connections

Perhaps someone should make light of the connections between the Samoan Pulotu and Hawaiki variants found throughout Polynesia. As the entrance to the Samoan Pulotu is located in Savai'i and Samoans too believe of spirits leaping off a cliff from Upolu then swimming to the entrance to Pulotu in Savai'i. Also the lake and tree found in Hawaiki and Pulotu should be mentioned. These show strong connections between Pulotu in Savai'i and Hawaiki. I also think that location of Cape Reinga(the leaping point for Maori) , shows connections to the Samoan Savai'i. It's not pointing to Tahiti or Rarotonga.

Firstly, please USE signatures!

Secondly while Te Reinga does point physically towards Savai'i that does not mean that New Zealand Māori directly migrated from Savai'i to New Zealand otherwise Samoan and New Zealand Māori would share more vocabulary and grammatical features and cultural practices. As it stands right now, New Zealand Māori has more in common with Cook Islands Māori (southern and northern variants) and Tahitian than Samoan.

Maori rahi (talk) 15:34, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

No one said anything about coming "directly" from Savai'i, Samoa. For most Maori waka Tahiti and Cook islands where the last departure point but, those places are not origins, they are stepping stones. Hawaiki is origins and the linguistic evidence suggests that Samoa Savai'i is the true origin of Maori.

The Cook Islands and Tahiti are places of origin for many New Zealand Maori (let's not forget some claim to come from the land Aotearoa itself). Its like saying England is not the place of origin of the English since they came from areas now known as France, Rome and Germany. Its like saying the Samoans do not originate from Samoa - they originate from Taiwan/Formosa.Maori rahi (talk) 07:25, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Material from Ratzel `The History of Mankind'

I am not qualified to edit the Hawaiki article but am writing to to bring to attention a view on the legends relating to Hawaiki written in the late 1800's by Professor Ratzel. This may provide material for developing the article. It can be viewed at http://www.inquirewithin.biz/history/american_pacific/oceania/migration_legends.htm and other related pages. Jason127 (talk) 22:50, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi Jason, thanks for the link. It's interesting stuff, but very dated, as might be expected. At least it shows how far our understanding has come since the late 1800s. It's not really legends per se, but Western reworkings of published accounts of legends gathered from very diverse locations and interpreted according to the theories prevalent at the time. A bit too far from the original legends to be of much value in expanding this article. Tho it could maybe inform an article about the changes in Western (pre-)anthropological attitudes to the peoples of the Pacific Kahuroa (talk) 06:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Some linguistic and geographical remarks

There is no 'savaiki' in Fiji, to my knowledge

sauali'i ("spirits" in Sāmoan) cannot be a cognate of Savaiki
hou'eiki ("chiefs" in Tongan) ? polynesian words have no plural, so this reference must be checked

the real name of 'Fatu Hiva' (official name) in the Marquesas, is 'Fatu iva' not 'Fatu 'iva' (where the word "iva" can be and is interpreted by locals as 'nine/9') S. JOURDAN — Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.47.107.7 (talk) 21:53, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Some Historians Believe that the Philippines is the Ancestral Homeland of the Polynesians

Some historians estimated the Lakanate of Lawan (forebear of Kaharian ng Tondo), to have existed on their ancient reign as around circa 70,000 years BC to 1,600 AD. The estimated seat of the epoch is calculated by some historians to be somewhere in the pacific islands of the Philippines, notably the third biggest island of the archipelago in the pacific called Samar -- somewhere in the present “Catubig – Laoang – Palapag” topography. Based on historical records of the Philippines and on recorded siday (the native oral historical epic) or oral Kandu of the people of Samar Island, some names of hadi (indigenous term for Lakan or paramount rulers) mentioned include Lakan Laon, Kerak, Magpog, Lakan Timamanukum, Lakan Arao, Lakan Matayon, Lakan Apula, Lapiton, Patuki, Lakan Biringon, Kalyaw, Makarato, Karagrag, Bingil, Dumaraog, Wihano, Karawton, Lakan Malagas, Taboon, Sangkayon, Waraytanggi, Bathaq, Uhabi, and Hadi Iberein. In the book by historian William Henry Scott, it was said that a “Samar datu by the name of Iberein was rowed out to a Spanish vessel anchored in his harbor in 1543 by oarsmen collared in gold; while wearing on his own person earrings and chains ”, a sign of a long prosperous civilization long before the Spaniards came. In the latest study published in the American journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, an international team of researchers led by Alan Cooper, director of the Australian Centre for Ancient DNA (ACAD), at the University of Adelaide used ancient DNA to study the origins and dispersal of ancestral Polynesian chickens. They found that Polynesian chickens had their genetic roots in the Philippines, making that region a candidate for the homeland of the mysterious Lapita people who transported the domesticated birds to the Pacific islands. The estimated dates of the reign of the above mentioned lakans or hadis are still subject of anthropological researches. For so many thousand long years, the Lakanate of Lawan slowly initiated a slow and enduring process of what could be an migration of inhabitants or expansion of their reign to different Polynesian islands in the pacific and inward into the Philippine archipelago that gave rise to the emergence of several prosperous settlements in most part of the country and pacific islands, like the Kingdom of Tondo in Manila.

unclear wording

The second paragraph of § Modern science and practical testing of theories begins:

However, DNA, linguistic, botanical, and archaeological evidence indicates that the Austronesian-speaking peoples (including the Polynesians) probably originated from islands in eastern Asia, possibly from Taiwan, [refs deleted] and moved southwards and eastwards through the South Pacific Ocean. The common ancestry of all the Austronesian languages, of which the Polynesian languages form a major subgroup, as well as all Austronesian language families but Malayo-Polynesian existing only in Taiwan, support this theory.

What does the bolded text refer to? The Malayo-Polynesian family is certainly not restricted to Taiwan, nor are other Austronesian language families in general. --Thnidu (talk) 01:56, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

I agree. It's a bit of a stretch to claim such specificity. It's an example of the epistemological failure of the eurocentric culture that dominates academia, so focused on specificity that it fails to consider new information effectively, disregarding any information that doesn't agree with the 'received' narrative. 117.20.116.0 (talk) 02:28, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Polynesian settlement in Mocha island

Kaoha nui. The article says "there is evidence of Polynesian settlement only in Chile.[11]". There is indeed, much to say about possible connections between the Mapuche culture or artefacts, and the Polynesians navigators. But the link "11" leads to an article that has nothing to deal with polynesian settlement. It talks about camelids. This should be edited. Thank you. --Papa Ru'au (talk) 23:23, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

New Information

I would encourage anyone interested to research the DNA of the Batak people of North Sumatra and the Ilocano people in Luzon, as they are closely related to the Polynesians. I discovered through personal research that the Batak (ID) people have 65% of their DNA the same as that of Tonga 2500BP, unlike the Javanese and Balinese who are predominantly descended from DNA found in Laos dated to 3000BP. Out of Taiwan is a nice theory, but there are other possibilities, the Batak people themselves (I'm married to one) say that they have stories about people leaving from Sumatera to both Madagascar and the Pacific, and that they have always been in Sumatra. When I first encountered the Batak people (I'm from Aotearoa New Zealand) I was stunned by the similarity of art forms and language, which sent me off down a rabbit hole. Could be enlightening to research the Indonesian Batak angle further. It certainly blew my mind and changed my perspective. Think more broadly than Taiwan. Just a tip if anyone is interested. 117.20.116.0 (talk) 02:14, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

that is an interesting note on the origin of the Polynesian as a whole. however, this page is on the Polynesian homeland that is probably after such, being Hawaiki. which island is Hawaiki? we do not know 808Poiboy (talk) 23:23, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

The three Homelands

the three homelands the maori say is ra'iatea, Hawaiki, and Tahiti. being that they have a name for ra'iatea which isn't it's old name, is it possible that Hawaiki, really is Hawai'i? 808Poiboy (talk) 23:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)