In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

124 In 1861, two central North Island Maori chiefs from the Waikato, Wiremu Toetoe and Te Hemara Rerehau, returned from a sojourn in Vienna where they were guests of the Austro-Hungarian authorities. While there they worked for nine months at a printing establishment and, on their departure, received the gift of a printing press from the Austro-Hungarian emperor.1 Later, this press allowed the Kingitanga (Maori King Movement) to publish its own newspaper, Te Hokioi e Rere Atu-na (literally,“the [mythical ] bird flying there,” hereafter referred to as Te Hokioi), to broadcast its own developing ideology and to counter the New Zealand government’s own propaganda directed at Maori. For several years, until stopped by war, this niupepa (newspaper), under the editorship of the Maori king’s cousin Wiremu Patara Te Tuhi, opposed the dominant colonialist discourses being promulgated in Maori-language newspapers produced by Pakeha (white New Zealanders). Te Hokioi was the first, and perhaps most radical, example of Indigenous media activism in New Zealand. In the early 1860s, its goal of a separate Maori state had real viability. This case study first describes the historical conditions that produced the Kingitanga and Te Hokioi. It then looks at concepts of racial/ethnic difference and how the way Maori imagined themselves changed after European contact, including the visualization of a Maori nation. In particular this study investigates Te Hokioi’s articulation of ethnicity and the legitimization of power that it disseminated in support of the concept of an independent Maori nation. Maori Desire for Tino Rangatiratanga (Autonomy) Maori expectations of Pakeha colonization ushered in by the Treaty of Waitangi (here after referred to as “the Treaty”) of 1840 were quite different from those of Pakeha and government officials. The Treaty, signed between Maori chiefs and a representative of the British Crown at Waitangi and then carried to other parts of the country for Maori signatures, was supposed to introduce a new and more “humane” method of British colonization.2 Composed of three articles, the first 7. Te Hokioi and the Legitimization of the Maori Nation L AC H Y PAT E R S O N T E H O K I O I A N D T H E L E G I T I M I Z A T I O N O F T H E M A O R I N A T I O N 125 ushered in British government, the second guaranteed Maori land ownership, and the third gave Maori the rights of British citizenship. However, it was predicated on the understanding that Maori would be willing to sell large tracts of land to the Crown for settlement, take on European customs, and subject themselves to British law and government. Moreover the wording of te Tiriti, the Maorilanguage version of the Treaty discussed and signed by chiefs, is inconsistent with that of the English version. In particular, te Tiriti guaranteed Maori their tino rangatiratanga, their full chiefly rights, and did not spell out clearly the“sovereignty” being ceded to the Crown.3 Indeed, in the first two decades of colonization most chiefs regarded the government more as the representatives of the white tribe rather than of their own.The government’s authority was nominal at best outside of Pakeha settlements, and it lacked the necessary administrative and military resources to effectively impose its will on Maori.4 The government’s underlying goal (shared by Pakeha settlers), however, was to eventually gain total sovereignty. To achieve this necessitated the diminution of the mana (power and authority) and tino rangatiratanga that Maori still retained. Without the necessary means to impose its will, the early colonial government instead sought to gain Maori acquiescence through persuasion and inducements.The governors were constrained both by a strong humanitarian sentiment prevalent in London, and by a paucity of officials and military forces, while Maori hapu and iwi5 retained a strong military capability.6 When the British Army did engage Maori forces during the mid-1840s, its achievements were less than decisive.7 Instead, the government paid pensions or salaries to important chiefs to gain their support or protection. Through the 1840s and 1850s it also promulgated a twin discourse of Christianity and civilization to Maori, particularly through its Maori-language newspapers.8 Naturally, the relinquishing of “waste” land for European settlement, and accepting the primacy of British sovereignty, state power, and English Law were important elements of this discourse.9 For both Maori and Pakeha...

Share