Maori Parliaments

This is a topic that interests me.

We generally associate Maori seperatism with The King Movement but there were many other groups who tried to create a seperate form of Government, often running beside the Pakeha system. It could be argued that Hongi and Te Rauparaha were evidence of this in the 1830's but the answer to this (although you could argue against this) is that they never wanted to establish a seperate Maori state simply to establish their Rangatiratanga over their own Rohe.

In fact Hongi didn't want to drive Pakeha away he wanted MORE of them. While Te Rauparaha has been called the 'Napoleon' of the south he was keen to have Pakeha around him and doesn't seem to have been wholly enthusiatic about the Wairau and was only an observer of the Wellington/Hutt valley war.

So where do we begin?

Kohimaramara in 1860 is Gore-Browns attmpt to undermine the Kingitanga and in its first meeting seems to show that Maori are divided and that a parliament is possible (and called for). His replacement Grey topedoes that and uses the Runanga's (Local Councils) to try and gain Maori compliance. It fails.

We have spent some time talking about the Kingitanga, but a quick reprise.... 1850's Maori disquiet over continual land losses... a campaign to find a suitable candidate finds Te Wherowhero the Kingitanga emerges in 1858 as a 'Land League' denying the Government and the Settlers any more land... creaesa climate of fear and anger. War in the Waitara leads to War in the Waikato and Tauranga. The Settler Government creates Legislation to allow confiscation and Greys invasion makes all Maori "rebels". Maori thus lost 2m acres confiscated and millions more disappear under the machinations of the Land Court.

After the loss of Rangiowhaia the King retreats into his Rohe. By the time he emerges in 1882 his political power is diminished by the actions of his affiliated tries including his allies Maniapoto.

His trip to visit Queen Victoria (to talk about the Treaty) in 1884 is a failure when the British send him back to NZ because it is no longer 'their' problem.

It could be argued that the Pai Marire faith had an element of separatism in its view especially the belief by Te Ua Haumene that at the day of reckoning Pakeha would leave New Zealand and it would be returned to Maori - an idea that drove some of the Hau Hau into battle.

The Governmment continues to gnaw away at Maori land holdings, as more land is lost the ability for Maori to achieve Economic (and Political) independence disappeared with it. Greys idea of digging around the King has eventually worked.

The 1872 Repudiation Movement was relatively localised and made little impression. Whether it belongs here is debatable.

Is Parihaka an example of separatism? Te Whiti and Tohu seems to have rejected Pakeha culture but retained much of its technology. The Village was the first place to get electricity and Te Whiti lived in avery nice Colonial Villa. They refused to teach their children in English and used Te Reo in the school. Its invasion and destruction in 1882 after many of its menfolk were exiled to Otago meant its viability was unlikely. Pakeha viewed it as a separatist movement with dangerous overtones of Hau Hau - an idea supported by the presence of an older Titokowaru who had given up his fight and returned to his more peaceful faith. Bryce certainly fanned the flames to ensure the Village was destroyed.

In 1892 the Kotahitanga Movement emerges in the far North based around mainly Kupapa tribes and with Ngapua Hone Heke as its leader. Because it rejected the King it could never really be seen as 'National' Maori body and with no recognition from the Government never really stood a chance.

The King is the centre of the last large(ish) movement in 1894, Kauhanganui. Based around the Kingitanga it is rejected by most of the North Islands Iwi and like Kotahitanga is ignored by the Government.

Once again it is Maori tribalism that inhibits them...