page 192

A. Introductory Remarks

We have already seen that the religious beliefs and practices of the Maori cannot be described without invading the realm of magic, and it is equally clear that myth also enters into such beliefs. We have scanned a considerable number of the superior myths of the Maori in Dominion Museum Bulletin 10, these coming principally under the heading of cosmogonic, theogonic and anthropogenic myths. There remain to be dealt with what may be termed second-class myths, such as origin myths, nature myths, and following these, folk tales and fables. The final section will deal with superstitious beliefs and omens. This part will merely contain illustrations of the various forms of myths and folk tales, fables and omens, much more has been collected and recorded, and again much has been lost through lack of field workers.

It is not necessary, in a study such as this, to discuss the origin of myths, but it will be seen that, of those given in the two parts (Bulletins 10 and 11) of this study, a large proportion is composed of origin myths and nature myths, and that these two classes intermingle to some extent. The curious form of belief termed animism, with which is connected that concept termed the Universal Soul in Nature, would naturally tend to promote the growth of myth, and, in popular folk tales, it has led to the endowing of inanimate objects with the powers of speech and locomotion. Many myths represent attempts to explain natural phenomena, and we have noted that many of the Maori gods were personifications of such phenomena. When a personified form is credited with, say the power of speech, then it is but a step further to endow an inanimate object with such power. As Tylor page 193himself remarked, "What we call poetry was to [old bards] real life"—Primitive Culture, vol. 1, p. 269; elsewhere he refers to Nature-Myths as: "those most beautiful of poetic fictions" (Tylor, ibid. vol. 1, p. 257). The close fellowship with Nature felt by such folk as the Maori would not merely render myth making easy, it would as it were be a natural sequence.

Myths are the fruit of a certain phase of mentality and a certain stage of culture, both of which we ourselves have outgrown, and yet we occasionally "slip a cog" in our onward path, and so put faith in a prophecy as to the end of the world, in faith healing seekers of shekels, or in Angels of Mons that make a mess of their job. But if myths are the product of a certain mental condition, it is also clear that they have, on their part, affected the development of human mentality. And if we have given up, or almost given up, the making of myths, such cannot be said for our children, who are still given to the invention of fairy tales and other simple recitals, at least it was so as late as my own childhood. The sort of occurrences from which myths were evolved of yore are still occurring, but, without mental outlook, we fail to evolve the myths. No longer does Uenuku stride across the vast realm of Watea in search of his lost bride Hine-makohu; albeit the rainbow, and space and mist are still with us. When Mahuika, in fiery wrath, assails us, we do not call up the battalions of Te Ihorangi to save us, but merely ring up the fire brigade. The past that was never present has held many charms for mankind throughout countless centuries, and still abides with us in written form. But even as Tane banished the Dawn Maid from the world of light to the underworld of Rarohenga, so has the developing mentality of man driven the mythopoetic concepts of our forbears into the realm of oblivion.

C. O. James considers that mythology is largely the product of the religious nature of man. One can but suppose that he was referring to superior myths, such as those given in Part 3 of Bulletin 10; but as to myths of a lower type, and folk tales, such as we are about to scorn, it is certain that other origins must be admitted. Another point is worth stressing here, and that is the fact that the mental capacity of myth makers differs widely. The superior myths of the Maori referred to above would be sought in vain among the Australian blacks and other similar races of mankind. The mythopoetic nature of many of our Maori myths renders them peculiarly attractive. Yet another matter worthy of mention is that of what constitutes a myth. For instance, our teachings concerning the Supreme Being, the origin of the page 194universe and of man, etc., are not viewed as myths by us but as solemn truth. But the beliefs of the Maori, as taught by his ancestors, concerning these same matters, we describe as myths. Are truth and falsehood matters of ethnic origin, or of locality? In this connection we must place myths in the same category as religion, the deciding factor is not that of truth or falsehood, but of birthplace or training.

During my sojourn among our Maori folk of New Zealand I have noted occurrences that, in pre-European times, might well have led to the formation of myths. In many of these cases I observed that a single occurrence, possibly one easily explainable, was so exaggerated as the story was passed on from hamlet to hamlet, that at last it had grown into quite a respectable myth. This aspect was specially noticeable in the case of the doings and prophecies of my worthy friend Rua-tapunui, the so-called New Messiah, he who caused the "temple" and village to be constructed at Maungapohatu; a settlement known, I grieve to say, among the ungodly as Kekataone (Crazytown). Assuredly love of the marvellous has been the originating impulse behind many of the Maori folk tales. An active mind prompted the study of causality, and that study led to the innumerable personifications connected with Maori myths. Explanatory myths must necessarily be numerous among such a people as the Polynesians. Tylor has drawn attention to a class of myths evolved in order to account for certain place names, and these are represented here in our isles (Primitive Culture, vol. 1, pp. 357-8). I have known cases wherein several different stories were told in order to account for such a name. Early settlers and others might have collected a great amount of interesting data pertaining to Maori lore, but few of them seemed to take any interest in such matters. Missionaries were disappointing in this respect in nearly all cases, but among them rises an exception in the Rev. R. Taylor, he who wrote "Maori mythology is extremely interesting and quite different from what we should expect from a people sunk in barbarism." (see Taylor, Te Ika a Maui, 2nd ed., pp. 108-9). Even in his time the writer tells us the younger Maori folk were indifferent to the traditions of the past, on account of the many fresh subjects of interest introduced by Europeans.

However, fanciful and improbable myths may be, however puerile the folk tales of a people, yet there is much to be learned from them with regard to the mental characteristics, habits and mode of life of such people. Marett tells us, in his Psychology and Folk Lore, that the study of folk lore means "The study of the life page 195of the folk, the acquisition, based on friendly converse, of insight into their mind and character. If he have this inward-seeking method and temper, the student of folk lore is entitled to rank as a psychologist even if he is innocent of formal erudition." (p. 26). E. B. Tylor, one of the very soundest of anthropologists, also gave us a truthful statement in his Primitive Culture—"It always happens, in the study of the lower races, that the more means we have of understanding their thoughts the more sense and reason do we find in them." A Maori myth that we look upon as being meaningless, puerile, or downright absurd, may have been the result of much thought, as in the case of some origin myths, for example. The Maori indulged much in recitals that we might term parables, and employed personifications and figurative expressions to such an extent that in some cases we do not grasp their meaning or teaching. We have never realised the Maori reliance upon personification and tutelary beings. When a Maori remarked that—"E kore a Para-whenuamea e haere ki te kore a Rakahore" how could we know that he meant that there would be no water springs if rock did not exist. "Para' will not move abroad in the absence of Rakahore" tells us nothing. When, after much travail, we ascertain that Para' is the personified form of water, and that Rakahore personifies rock, we still need an explanation of the saying. This explanation is to the effect that water springs would not exist were it not for the rock that lies below the surface of the earth, the water is unable to sink far within the body of the Earth Mother, and so finds an outlet in the form of springs or rivulets.

Origin myths contain many personification terms. When we are told, for example, that eels are descended from a being named Te Ihorangi, we find, on equiry, that Te Ihorangi, alias Hine-te-ihorangi, is the Rain Maid, who provides the earth with fresh water; at the same time Para-whenuamea, the daughter of Hine-tupari-maunga, the Mountain Maid, represents the waters of the earth, but not rain. Many illustrations of the Maori love of mythopoetic imagery and ambiguity (from our point of view) will be given later on.

Mythology, we are told, is not history, but, at the same time, it intrudes upon the sphere of history as it does upon that of religion. Tylor refers to one aspect of such intrusion in the following sentence: "The invention of ancestries from eponymic heroes or name-ancestors has, however, often had a serious effect in corrupting the historic truth, by helping to fill ancient annals with swarms of fictitious genealogies." (Tylor, Primitive Culture page 196vol. 1, p. 361). This form of corruption is very noticeable in Polynesian annals, wherein we note many lines of descent that are, in their earlier parts, certainly fictitious, lists of names of mythical beings, persons, who never existed. In some cases we recognise the non-human element, in others we do not. Names such as Rangi and Papa, representing the Sky Parent and Earth Mother we view as pertaining to personification, but in many cases I feel confident that we have viewed as genuine ancestors what are merely personifications or other products of the power of imagination. These remarks are not however, applied to Maori eponymic ancestors.

We must ever remember that the Maori drew no line between purely religious beliefs, practices, teachings and the higher class of myths, though he did assign a separate place to ordinary folk tales, likewise a special term. But do we not ourselves act in a very similar manner? We teach many things as part of our religious beliefs that would be viewed as myths by those who uphold other faiths. When viewed by a disinterested observer both systems of teaching, European and Maori, would be classified as teeming with allegorical concepts. We see, among even a backward folk like the Polynesians, how truths pertaining to natural laws and phenomena were presented in the form of allegories; in some cases we even see how moral lessons, the forerunners of Aesop's Fables, were expressed in a similar manner. An examination of Polynesian mythology and spiritual concepts impresses one with the truth of a remark made by Baring-Gould in his Origin and Development of Religious Belief—"The uneducated and vulgar mind at once personifies what is absolute, and materialises what is abstract." As for the comingling of myth and religion, is it not universal in all the more important cults?

Reference may here be made to the two aspects of Maori myths and legends. This refers not only to myths but to many legendary recitals, such as those describing the doings of famous ancestors. The superior versions of such things are of an esoteric nature and were preserved by a few trained experts. The common version, as known to the bulk of the people, is a much cruder form as a rule; in the case of historical legends the common version contains much more of the marvellous. In some of the superior myths, cosmogonic and anthropogenic, we have already seen that a wide difference may exist between the esoteric and popular forms. The latter are ever the more literal, more materialistic, in some cases gross, and this reminds me of a remark in MacKenzie's Indian page 197Myth and Legend, "the speculative sages who, in their quest for truth used primitive myths to illustrate profound doctrinal teachings. By the common people these myths were given literal interpretation."

In an account of Asiatic methods of conserving and teaching venerated and sacerdotal lore given in Hewitt's Primitive Traditional History, the author describes how the old time folk of Southern Asia kept national records in the form of stories. These were preserved by priests appointed to retain the old history, and to add to it new chapters summarising the events of their time. The historical abstractions preserved by bards are often of a mythopoetic nature, and man is shown to be descended from the gods. The writer then remarks: "As time elapsed the memory of the past died out and was only preserved in the ritual of which the inner meaning was kept by the priests secret from the public, and only imparted to select pupils in guild schools of India, Persia, and the Semitic countries and in Greek mysteries. Hence all real acquaintance with national History expired." He goes on to show how the inner meaning of the stories, at first orally preserved, was retained by a few, and in some cases entirely lost. All this is very Maori, and illustrates Maori methods. These are the methods by means of which the ritual of the cult of Io was conserved and retained by a few. Now that the few who possessed knowledge of that nature, as also the inner meaning of historical and cutural myths, have passed away we have no Maori folk to explain things to us, and the Maori of today are woefully ignorant of the meaning of their own myths, allegorical stories and personifications.

A number of able judges have expressed a belief that, owing to the long isolation of the Polynesian people, their mythology is of particular interest to anthropologists. It can certainly be said that the mythopoetic allegories and innumerable personifications of Polynesian mythology are extremely enlightening in connection with the mind of barbaric man and its mode of working. When couched in the native tongue, with its figurative expressions and peculiar idioms, they are decidedly attractive. The task of translating such conceptions I do not enjoy, inasmuch as they appear to lose so much when rendered into English. This leads me to remark that in order to understand and appreciate the myths of a people, it is necessary to study them in the native tongue.

Many of our Maori myths of New Zealand are known far and wide across the Polynesian area, and a few are found to the page 198westward in Melanesia; the stories describing the deeds of Maui are very widespread, as also is the myth of Hina and the phallic eel. Divers writers trace some of them to Asia, and even further; but among these are myths that are found the wide world over, such as those of the waters of life and the celestial bride. Some of our Maori myths of the demon lore class were evidently introduced from Polynesia, together with certain superior myths, and those of local growth here resemble Polynesian productions. I cannot understand how Colenso came to write of Maori myths as follows: "They all show their common New Zealand source; and, as far as is known, vary very much indeed from anything similar among the Polynesian race." Many of these myths are found in Polynesia and were on record in Colenso's time. Nor is the language in all of them modern, as stated by that writer, who includes as myths the traditions of the coming of the ancestors of the Maori to New Zealand.

One of the best Maori authorities of the past century informed his people that the expert retainers of native lore clearly understood that all folk tales, korero purakau, korero tara, were quite distinct from genuine traditions of tribal history, etc. He alluded to such popular folk tales as korero whaihanga, i.e., invented stories, fiction. At the same time we see that such inventions often enter into historical traditions, owing to the Maori love of the marvellous. There is another origin to which some folk tales may be referred, that is such stories as have been evolved in order to emphasise some social usage, disciplinary measure, or moral lesson. Thus we have tales of persons having been carried off, and in some cases devoured, by monsters, on account of their having transgressed some rule of tapu. We will, anon, deal with such a tale in the story of Parekawa.

Another expert explained that the story of Maui fishing up land from ocean depths is a mere fiction. It was ever a mere fireside tale, and had no place in the superior teachings. Na, ko te korero mo te hiinga a Maui, he korero tera na te takurua, ehara i te korero wha kaheki iho no roto i te whore wananga.

Fornander, in his remarks on the origin of the Polynesian race, speaks of "that mixture of myths, that jumble of confused reminiscences, which stock the legends and load the memory of the Polynesian tribes." I am by no means assured that all such matters were a jumble in the minds of Polynesians, but they have often been confusing to us, and for two reasons. In the first place we could not view these myths and traditions from the native point of view, their modes of expression were often not page 199understood by us, we stood outside a ring barrier looking at what appeared to be confusion. Again, we have after all, recorded but a small portion of the myths and traditions of Polynesia, in many cases we have not sufficient data to enable us to see the light, many isles are not represented in recorded lore. Different versions of a myth or legend, as obtained from different tribes or isles, are extremely helpful to those who strive to explain them. When endeavouring to peer into the meaning of our local Maori myths, teeming with allegory and laden with personifications, I derived much assistance from recorded data from other isles, more especially from Fornander's collection of Hawaiian lore.

In The Mythology of all Races, vol. 9, treating of the Pacific area, Roland Dixon makes some enlightening remarks on the presence of Melanesian myths in the Polynesian area. In the first place he deals with incidents of wide Melanesian distribution "which occur only in a single group or in a restricted area in Polynesia." Of these he says: "As regards Samoa … almost half of the episodes which are purely local and confined to Samoa, so far as Polynesia is concerned, are recorded in Melanesia. In New Zealand the comparable figure rises to nearly three-fourths; but, on the other hand, there are practically no episodes of this type in the Society and Cook Groups. It is clear, then, that from this point of view there is a very strong Melanesian element in New Zealand and Samoa … The individual incidents of Melanesian similarity are, moreover, different in each case, one series being found in New Zealand, another in Samoa, and a third in Hawaii. Those occurring in Samoa and New Zealand are … especially characteristic of Eastern Melanesia. The ancestors of those [Polynesian immigrants] who reached Samoa and New Zealand must have passed through much of eastern Melanesia." (Dixon, Oceanic Mythology, p. 95).

Of the second type of agreements, those dealing with myth-incidents, which are not confined to single portions of Polynesia, but are common to two or more island-groups, our author states that they include a fifth of Hawaiian myths as of Melanesian origin, slightly less of the Society Group, slightly more of the Samoan and the Cook Group, but nearly one half of New Zealand myth-incidents.

This paragraph concludes with the remark: "The great proportion of Melanesian incidents in New Zealand would argue a strong infusion of this darker blood among the Maori." (Oceanic Mythology, p. 96).

page 200

If the above statements are correct then they provide much food for thought, for instance, how and by whom were such myth-incidents brought to New Zealand, were they acquired elsewhere by Polynesian folk and by them introduced into these isles, or were they brought hither by immigrants from the Melanesian area? Did Maruiwi mothers impart their folk tales to their children begotten by Polynesian immigrants, and were Maruiwi Melanesians, or partially so?

A third series of far spread myths is represented by such as that of Maui, universally known throughout Polynesia and also in at least some parts of Melanesia. Possibly these were carried westward by Polynesian migrants.

It is not intended to include in this study all the better known Maori myths, inasmuch as a number of them have been placed on record in such works as Sir George Grey's Polynesian Mythology, the Rev. R. Taylor's Te Ika-a-Maui, and other works, including the Journal of the Polynesian Society, John White's Ancient History of the Maori, and the Transactions of the New Zealand Institute. Such tales as are not included in their entirety will, however, in most cases be included in an abridged form, and this remark applies especially to such semi-historical traditions as those concerning Kupe the sea rover, the voyage of Rata, the adventures of Whiro and Tura, and others of that class. So far as we can judge these are tales concerning genuine ancestors and their doings in the world of life, but the marvels beloved of the Maori have crept into them; in some cases such weird accretions consist of old, old fables that are encountered far and wide across the Pacific, and occasionally still further afield. In the case of the well known Maui myths the above mentioned intention seems to be disregarded and this for two reasons. In the first place some little known aspects are illustrated in the versions herein published and moreover it is considered desirable to place on record some of these recitals of Maori myths accurately translated from the original tongue.

In his work already quoted above, Roland Dixon alludes to the confusion that exists in Polynesian mythology, the several conflicting versions of origin myths, etc. At p. 27 he alludes to the dual aspect of Tiki, but data obtained from the Maori of New Zealand has now cleared away our former misconceptions regarding that being. This author has, however, on the same page, touched one of the most important of keys to Polynesian mythology, as follows "… many or most of the characters in the myths are nothing more than thinly disguised personifications page 201of natural phenomena." Much of the confusion alluded to above might be explained by one acquainted with these natives. For example we know that, among our local Maori folk, there were two different versions of many myths, the esoteric version and that known to the ordinary people. We have scanned in Bulletin 10 the two aspects of Maori cosmogonic and anthropogenic myths. Most of the data collected has certainly been contributed by what we may term second class authorities, men who were not acquainted with superior versions. I have often been inclined to divide such contributors into three grades—(1) The high class experts who have very seldom divulged high class teachings to Europeans, and only to a select few of their own people. (2) Men who were taught by their elders second class teaching, e.g., the evolutionary cosmogonic myths as opposed to creation by a Supreme Being. (3) Persons who were never taught tribal lore but merely picked up a certain knowledge of second and third class matter by listening to recitals delivered in public. These latter are by far the most accessible and are, moreover, often irresponsible, and so lend confusion to divers subjects by means of careless discourse.

The writer who essays to give an account of the myths of a particular island is fortunate in having a simple, or at least comparatively simple task before him. He who endeavours to perform such a task in connection with a group of islands encounters many difficulties and will probably have to explain the different versions of a myth. But the man who tries to make a clear survey of the myths of such a region as Polynesia, of a verity he wadeth in deep waters. Apart from the confusing effect of movements of peoples in past times, he has to deal with the effects of isolation of people in small and far scattered communities. Again, the data supplied by different authorities differs much in value, and with regard to some isles one may have little or no data to work on. Our collection of Polynesian myths has been carried out in a sporadic manner by a few men who took an interest in such researches; men of the Ellis and Fornander type did excellent work in the days when natives were conversant with old usages. The trained specialists of late years have not enjoyed such advantages, neither would they possess those derived form a long residence among the native folk. The weakness of our comparative work is the result of two things, the most important of which is the fact that the gaps in our recorded data are many and serious; the second cause is that such data differs much in value. The Hawaiian Isles and New Zealand have page 202preserved the most complete accounts of native life of former times, while the Society, Samoan and Cook Groups are not so well represented. In a number of cases we have a considerable quantity of traditionary lore, myths, etc., on record, but extremely little concerning the material culture of the natives. The ordinary everyday and seasonal industries of the people were often quite neglected, or given but scant notice, this aspect is most marked in the case of the Cook Islands.

Attention is drawn to the Maori genius for personification, and this is most noticeable in his origin myths. Many of these personification terms were known to all, and were frequently employed in everyday life. Thus, on observing a tree falling, a Maori will exclaim "E! Kua hinga a Tane" (O! Tane has fallen). Many a time, when engaged in felling a tree, has the writer been accosted as follows: " Kei te raweke koe i to tipuna i a Tane" (You are meddling with your ancestor Tane). In the following extract from a farewell to dead tribesmen, those dead ones are compared to forest giants, the larger and more useful trees, while survivors, living persons of the tribe, are likened to small trees of inferior quality: "Haere! Haere! Haere ra, tama nui ma, tama roa ma Kaere ki te Po. Kua hinga nga rakau nui a Tane, kua how te pa i Monoa; waiho iho nei matau, nga mahoe, nga mako, nga kaiwhiria." (Farewell ye great ones, farewell, to the spirit world. The great and lordly trees of Tane have fallen, the stronghold at Moana has fallen, and we alone, the inferior mahoe, mako, and kaiwhiria trees, remain).