Moriori Pacifism

A Viable Strategy or Fatal Vulnerability?

Image: https://education-resources.co.nz/moriori/rekohu/

In 1835 900 Taranaki Māori invaded Rēkohu (the Chatham Islands - the name translates to “misty sun”). There was no violent resistance; the 1,600 local Moriori had lived without killing for several hundred years. Many Moriori were killed and the remainder enslaved.  This provided Māori with a workforce.  Also, marriage between Moriori men and women was forbidden, only Māori men could ‘marry’ Moriori women.

Historian Michael King (author of the definitive history of the Moriori) remarks that there is much “unsubstantiated rubbish” written about the Moriori and their subjugation (P215, Moriori). Was this because the aggression of the Māori invaders provided a handy rationalisation for the colonisation of the Māori?

Linguistic research indicates that Moriori were originally Māori, who arrived in Rēkohu around 1500. The Moriori were hunter-gatherers – the crops they brought with them did not thrive in the wet, cold and windy environment.  They fished, birded, collected shellfish, and their diet also included seals and occasional stranded pilot whales.

Moriori chief Nunuku-whenua decreed an end to lethal violence after generations of fighting and killing. Duels between males with an issue to resolve were permitted. Fighting had to stop when blood was drawn (no mention as far as I can find of violence against women and children). 

Fighting, within the group and with other groups is a significant cause of mortality in hunter-gather groups.  While hunter-gatherers have lower levels of violence and death than settled human groups the death rate from violence is still high. As high as 1,000 per 100,000 homicide rate (in the Hiwi hunter-gatherers of Venezuela.).   

A prohibition on extreme violence would have saved many Moriori lives, and reduced the misery of those living but wary of the threat of violence.  But, this prohibition was designed to reduce violence in a small society with no external threat.

In the summer of 1832-33 a sailing ship arrived at Ocean Bay.  The crew and passengers were welcomed by local Moriori. But they were disconcerted by the behaviour of one of the passengers.  A Ngati Mutanga (North Taranaki) chief, Matioro, is described by King as “a dancer…rolling his eyes and flicking his tongue.” (P 54)  He quizzed the locals on their politics, religion and sacred places.  A cooking pot from the ship was left in one of the local sacred areas (where food is forbidden) – a provocation attributed to Matioro.

This was a clear indication that the Moriori now faced a serious threat.  That materialised two years later.

Matioro is likely to have reported back to his kinsmen – who were stranded in Port Nicholson. These Taranaki Māori had been chased off their land and ended at Port Nicholson on Wellington Harbour.  They decided that Rekehu represented a better option. 

They arrived and began to ‘walk’ the land, signally they were taking possession.  Moriori men who argued with them were killed. 

A meeting of Moriori was called at Te Awapatiki .  This three-day session of nearly 1,000 men is characterised by King as a disagreement between the older men who argued for the retention of their values of non-violence, and younger men who pushed for taking the initiative and fighting the invaders.  The decision was made – no violence. 

The Māori used this meeting as the rationale for their pre-emptive attack.

The Māori chief Te Rakatau Katihe, described the result (in an 1870 Land Court session): "We took possession ... in accordance with our custom, and we caught all the people. Not one escaped. Some ran away from us, these we killed; and others also we killed – but what of that? It was in accordance with our custom. I am not aware of any of our people being killed by them." (P64)

Nearly 200 years later, in August this year (after the attempted mutiny of Wagner Group boss Yeveny Prigozhin), Russian President Vladimir Putin justified the invasion of Ukraine as a response to the threat of a hostile Ukraine armed by the West and enacting the United State’s fascist ideology.  This ‘aggressive defence’ is the same excuse used by the Māori to justify their near-extermination of the Moriori.

In a bizarre side-note – in a June 2023 story in Stuff, Prizoghin appears in front of a world map featuring the Wagner Group’s interests. Off to the east of New Zealand there is a pin marking the Chathams.  Presumably, this was a handy place to pin the map. Or did it reflect Prizoghin’s plan B?

Image: Stuff - Prizoghin sharing his expansion plans

Among the myths that Michael King deals with in telling the story of the Moriori is that Māori cleaned the Moriori from New Zealand. Maui Soloman, chair of the Hokotehi Moriori Trust describes the power of the myth that Māori eliminated the inferior Moriori from New Zealand. This provided a rationale for colonists: ”If Māori could push Moriori out of NZ, then later European migrants could push Māori off their land.” Also, if Māori had done that to the Moriori, well, didn’t they have it coming to them?

We have a moral and legal system to ensure it is not the strongest who kill and steal with impunity. And we have a system of international law that outlaws genocide and attacks on sovereign states.

After the February 2022 invasion of Ukraine by Russia Donald Trump described Putin’s attack as ‘genius’ and ‘savvy’. During an interview Trump described his reaction to the aggression: “I went in yesterday and there was a television screen, and I said, ‘This is genius.’ Putin declares a big portion of the Ukraine — of Ukraine — Putin declares it as independent. Oh, that’s wonderful.”

Trump and Putin demonstrate the authoritarian rationalisation of attacking another group – because you have the power and audacity to do it.  As Te Rakatau Katihe put it – “it’s our custom.” 

Chief Nunuku-whenua introduced a remarkable innovation – outlawing extreme violence.  That was not a sustainable solution in a world where aggressors were rewarded for their violence.  It has been a successful approach to managing relationships between groups and states so long as there is a moral and legal framework – ‘the rules-based order’ – that sanctions such illegal behaviour.

Being prepared to fight for freedom remains necessary.

Pericles, speaking at the funeral of Athenian fighters, at the end of the first year of the Peloponnesian War (BC 431-404): “Therefore, having judged that to be happy means to be free, and to be free means to be brave, do not shy away from the risks of war.”

Image: Two Moriori women and a child, c.1906 - https://andrebrett.com/rekohu-and-histories-of-violence/