Talk:Māori migration canoes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


I've rearranged the article to try to emphasize the facts that we do have these legends and that the 'fleet hypothesis' is an erroneous conflation of them. In the earlier arrangement, the fleet hypothesis was allowed to swallow too much of the content. Again (as ever) feel free to undo this in part or whole if you think it needs it. Bucketsofg 13:20, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Kiraua canoe[edit]

Any more information on this canoe? Nothing on Google - might it be a typo? Kahuroa 01:48, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Oops! It's Kirauta. Bucketsofg 22:43, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

trim PolySoc[edit]

I've trimmed the introduction to the 'great fleet' hypothesis, since some of this stuff is not needed here and better understood in the PolySoc and Smith entries.

whither this article?[edit]

Copied from Bucketsofg's talk page:

Something to consider before moving stuff into SpSmith article. Should we make a new article 'Great Fleet hypothesis' or similar title, to take the stuff out of MMC. This might allow the inclusion of material relating to GFH after SPS. Kahuroa 12:03, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I think maybe we should hold off on some of these points now. What is really needed first, I think, is an article on Fornander. I'm going into the library of the university nearest to where I work and will have a poke around. Bucketsofg 13:39, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan to me. Kahuroa 23:45, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Just a point tho - if we take out the Great Fleet hypothesis section out of this article, isn't the rest of it really just a restatement of the Smith's Kupe/Seven canoes hypothesis which is regarded pretty scathingly in New Zealand academic circles these days (See the Te Ara articles linked to in the article). That is the reason I put the Great Fleet hypothesis section into this article in the first place Kahuroa 10:41, 2 May 2006 (UTC).
Yes, that could be a problem. But I don't want to expel it completely, just trim it to a more appropriate length. At the moment SMith's hypothesis seems to swallow up the article: it's as if an evolution article got overwhelmed by explanations of why creationism can't work. What I have in mind is a series of paragraphs on the individual myths, noting what stories come from where, involve whom, etc. Then close with a single short paragraph that Smith attempted to unify these widely divergent myths into a single great fleet, but that it has been refuted because of x and y with a reference to a separate, more lengthy article on the fleet hypothesis. In that article, we can hopefully explain more fully Fornander's influence and Simmon's demolition. But this is just an idea. Bucketsofg 14:46, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Well the article kind of looked like it was pretty much based on Smith's idea. Your idea is good - BTW see the two links in the External references section for contemporary NZ opinion, especially the second. But what should be done about the articles - mostly stubs admittedly, but easy enough to expand (I must make a to do list) - that already deal with quite a few of these canoes? There is already a bit of duplication - Tainui and Tainui (canoe). 19:52, 2 May 2006 (UTC) - that was me... forgot to sign or left a tilde off or something Kahuroa 07:56, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Removed this note[edit]

Nevers mon ami, I took your note out of the References section beside Walter and Moeka'a because it doesn't relate to the topic of the article: "Most of these materials had already been published in the Journal of the Polynesian Society in 1919 and 1920, translated by S.P. Smith. This edition is a re-translation of these materials with few inedit manuscripts from the same original narrator. Te Ariki Tara 'Are was a mataiapo and a descent of a famous ta'unga of the Takitumu tribe (Rarotonga)." The only material from History and Traditions of Rarotonga that is quoted from in the article is the Preface (dated 2000) by Richard Walter and Rangi Moeka'a, not the material published in the JPS in 1920-1. Kahuroa 10:57, 3 April 2007 (UTC)


When we talk of migration it is necessary to think like a polynesian in 1280. When polynesians arrived here they arrived in a "group of islands",not New Zealand. As far as they wre concerned going from the Cook Island to say the North Island was no different from going from The North to Stewart Island-apart from not having to cross so much open ocean.That us "New Zealand" is a modern concept. It has been hypothesized in the 1970s that some Maori legends of migration may have been movements within New Zealand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:20, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Waka not suited to ocean travel[edit]

Currently in NZ a waka refers to a slim single hull canoe. The designs evident in NZ now -which go back perhaps to the 1860s, are totally unsuited to ocean crossing. They have almost no freeboard, are heavy and cumbersome in anything other that a near flat sea. Missionaries recorded that in the 1830s Maori waited till summer to travel and even then would sit on the beach waiting for a calm period-sometimes for weeks. Over the last 20yeras there have ben several incidents of waka sinking when being paddled alonfgthe coast in less than ideal conditions The chances of one of these waka getting from the Cook Islands to NZ is nil. If 2 hulls are converted to a catamaran you still have a not very seaworthy vessel. The long waka taua relied on a plentiful supply of tall trees that had light weight easity worked timber. Did such wood exist in the Cook Islands? The modern "reinactments" dont really prove a lot apart from that it is possible to make a wooden catamaran using modern tools and knowledge that when equipped with an outboard and modern navigation equipment and a plentiful supply of modern food, can be towed from NZ to the Cooks by a large mother ship.In reality we have no idea at all how the first polynesian came to NZ. James Cook did see catamarans in the islands but not in NZ. He did see waka in NZ using very small sails. Its just a guess that Maori arrived here in catamarans.Probably a good guess. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:40, 1 August 2012 (UTC)