Post by Kiwi Frontline on Feb 24, 2016 5:58:47 GMT 12
Wanganui Chronicle 24/2/16
MAORI ISOLATION
Any understanding of the development of Maori culture in the centuries before the coming of the European is best found in knowledge of the facts. Polynesians had lost all contact with the interlinked civilisations of Eurasia around 3500 years ago, taking with them the beliefs and knowledge of that time. They did not take part in, or know of, the many advances over the several millennia, in philosophy, in religion, in knowledge and science, in technology and new tools. They lacked writing, metals and the wheel.
Here is an answer to the question raised by Cushela Robson (Letters, February 16) of what might have been, in the reality of what actually did happen. She said that "I wonder what makes you think that Maori — left to themselves, or exposed to other cultures but in control of their own destiny — would not have continued to evolve like any other race?"
In isolation, any group of people (call them a race or whatever you wish) will fail to share the advances of the mass of humanity. Thus, Maori remained tribal and superstitious, settling disagreement by battle rather than within a system of law, retaining old beliefs in atua and lacking good healthcare.
Many chiefs saw the advantages of the new alternative and asked for, joined in, and celebrated the central authority that steadily brought modern civilisation to them. That brought change, and many advances, including the international trade, shipping, farming, the English language and new religious constructs listed by Robson.
The Treaty of Waitangi said that we are one people. We should refuse the bogus framework of the reconstructed version that would separate us by race.
JOHN ROBINSON
Wellington
The New Zealand Herald 24/2/16
ON SLIME
On February 22, a white man throws an objectionable mess at a Cabinet minister and is promptly arrested. On February 6, a part-Maori woman throws an objection-able object at a Cabinet minister and is not arrested. Spot the difference? A dry-cleaning bill.
BRUCE MOON,
Nelson.
Bay of Plenty Times 24/2/16
ISSUES DIVORCED FROM REALITY
Re Peter Dey. There is one Tiriti o Waitangi (Maori version) and there is no English treaty.
There are, of course, English drafts the final Hobson draft was i r r ef utably what has become known as t he Littlewood Draft that essentially cross translates word for word with the Maori treaty.
I, for one, am only interested in the historical accuracy of the treaty and other than that it holds no real interest for me as only an historical relic that has had its day. The overriding importance of the Littlewood Draft is that it confirmed the correct English translation of the Maori treaty.
What is of real concern is that treaty supporters and separatists try to interpret what is not contained in the treaty to suit their special agendas and self interests.
Talk of principles, obligations and partnerships are post-1975 legal and political fictions divorced from reality. (Abridged)
R P
Matapihi
TOTALLY FLUENT
Peter Dey is correct that Governor William Hobson could not speak Maori, but is wrong when he states that “unfortunately the treaty could not be translated directly into Maori” ( Opinion, February 18).
Henry Williams and his son Edward were totally fluent in the Maori language and they translated Busby’s final draft overnight on February 4, 1840.
If the Littlewood Treaty is not the correct treaty, then why did my local library have it, word for word, on display for several weeks?
The heading on the display stated correctly that it is “James Busby’s final English draft written on the 4th of February 1840” — and right beside it, was the “Rev. Henry William’s translation into Maori from Busby’s final draft”.
I read right through the display, as no doubt many have over the last few weeks, and throughout the whole document, not a single mention of forests and fisheries!
R B
Tauranga
MAORI ISOLATION
Any understanding of the development of Maori culture in the centuries before the coming of the European is best found in knowledge of the facts. Polynesians had lost all contact with the interlinked civilisations of Eurasia around 3500 years ago, taking with them the beliefs and knowledge of that time. They did not take part in, or know of, the many advances over the several millennia, in philosophy, in religion, in knowledge and science, in technology and new tools. They lacked writing, metals and the wheel.
Here is an answer to the question raised by Cushela Robson (Letters, February 16) of what might have been, in the reality of what actually did happen. She said that "I wonder what makes you think that Maori — left to themselves, or exposed to other cultures but in control of their own destiny — would not have continued to evolve like any other race?"
In isolation, any group of people (call them a race or whatever you wish) will fail to share the advances of the mass of humanity. Thus, Maori remained tribal and superstitious, settling disagreement by battle rather than within a system of law, retaining old beliefs in atua and lacking good healthcare.
Many chiefs saw the advantages of the new alternative and asked for, joined in, and celebrated the central authority that steadily brought modern civilisation to them. That brought change, and many advances, including the international trade, shipping, farming, the English language and new religious constructs listed by Robson.
The Treaty of Waitangi said that we are one people. We should refuse the bogus framework of the reconstructed version that would separate us by race.
JOHN ROBINSON
Wellington
The New Zealand Herald 24/2/16
ON SLIME
On February 22, a white man throws an objectionable mess at a Cabinet minister and is promptly arrested. On February 6, a part-Maori woman throws an objection-able object at a Cabinet minister and is not arrested. Spot the difference? A dry-cleaning bill.
BRUCE MOON,
Nelson.
Bay of Plenty Times 24/2/16
ISSUES DIVORCED FROM REALITY
Re Peter Dey. There is one Tiriti o Waitangi (Maori version) and there is no English treaty.
There are, of course, English drafts the final Hobson draft was i r r ef utably what has become known as t he Littlewood Draft that essentially cross translates word for word with the Maori treaty.
I, for one, am only interested in the historical accuracy of the treaty and other than that it holds no real interest for me as only an historical relic that has had its day. The overriding importance of the Littlewood Draft is that it confirmed the correct English translation of the Maori treaty.
What is of real concern is that treaty supporters and separatists try to interpret what is not contained in the treaty to suit their special agendas and self interests.
Talk of principles, obligations and partnerships are post-1975 legal and political fictions divorced from reality. (Abridged)
R P
Matapihi
TOTALLY FLUENT
Peter Dey is correct that Governor William Hobson could not speak Maori, but is wrong when he states that “unfortunately the treaty could not be translated directly into Maori” ( Opinion, February 18).
Henry Williams and his son Edward were totally fluent in the Maori language and they translated Busby’s final draft overnight on February 4, 1840.
If the Littlewood Treaty is not the correct treaty, then why did my local library have it, word for word, on display for several weeks?
The heading on the display stated correctly that it is “James Busby’s final English draft written on the 4th of February 1840” — and right beside it, was the “Rev. Henry William’s translation into Maori from Busby’s final draft”.
I read right through the display, as no doubt many have over the last few weeks, and throughout the whole document, not a single mention of forests and fisheries!
R B
Tauranga