page 314

Comparisons with New Zealand.

Except for the flying-fish and the barracouta, the fishing methods of Aitutaki took place within the lagoon. It is natural that they utilised the cocoanut leaf in a number of ways that could not apply to the Maori.

Netting. The Island netting technique is totally different to that of New Zealand. The Aitutaki technique, wherever they derived it, was influenced by using a large ball of twine that could not go through the mesh. The Maori, in most of his nets, used short strips of flax. The short strips did not require a netting needle. The knot made was a weaver's knot, but in the opposite way to the English knot. When making some of the finer nets of dressed flax fibre cord, the Maori still used the same technique. The whole length of cord had to pass directly through the mesh. He therefore worked with convenient short lengths, and either joined the ends by rolling into a continuous cord, or made an ordinary knotting join. The Aitutaki technique is thus superior to that of the Maori.

Linton,¹ however, figures the Marquesan netting knot, and says that it is the common Polynesian knot. It is the same as the Maori. It is evident, therefore, that the Aitutaki technique is more recent, and its distribution is necessary to throw light on its origin.

The method of attaching sinkers to seine nets is also different. The Maori chipped grooves round his sinkers to prevent the tying cords from slipping off. The method of drawing the net was also different, owing to local conditions.

The general technique of bag nets is the same as regards closing the ends and the bottom. Figs. 244 and 245, showing this, are taken from the author's paper² on Maori netting. There was one important difference, however. The Aitutakian did not add extra meshes to a row to increase the width. He narrowed the net towards the bottom by using narrower gauges. Thus the top of the net remained on the suspensory cord. The Maori widened his strip of netting by adding extra meshes, mata torea. The narrowest part of the net remained on the suspensory cord, and it was this part that was subsequently closed to form the bottom.

Weirs. The Island weirs depended on ava, channels, in the reef. The object was to direct fish coming down on page 315a falling tide into an enclosure. The New Zealand weirs were built on awa, fresh water streams and rivers. The downward current took the fish within the arms of the weir, which directed them into a fish trap. The walls of the Island weir were made of stone, and the Maori of woodwork. In each case the application of a principle was influenced by local conditions. New Zealand had no lagoon with an encircling coral reef, and Aitutaki had no rivers. Yet they both built their weirs on awa.

The nearest approach to the Island weir is seen on the East Coast of the North Island. Here, owing to a tilting of the geological strata, there are a number of channels, up which the kehe, Haplodactylus meandratus, come to feed. The sides of well-known channels have been built up with stones. At special places a man takes his stand with a scoop net, whilst another drives the fish up the channel with a pole into the net. Here we have a close affinity with the pa tute of Aitutaki. One of these channels, named Wananga, had walls made with layers of fern and stones. It was built by an ancient tribe named Ngati-Ruanuku, who were dispossessed by the present Ngati-Porou. The present stability of the walls is attributed to potent incantations recited during their construction. This means that the Ngati- Ruanuku had retained to a greater degree the stone weir building craft of Polynesia. Their ancestors may have early settled in the one part of New Zealand where nature had made the exercise of the craft possible.

Hooks. Attention has been drawn to the statement of Makea Ariki that only one hook, the toko hook for catching barracouta, existed in the Lower Cook Group. The hook has no barb. No barb is required for the barracouta. The Maori barracouta hook has no barb. It would appear that the other methods for procuring fish were so productive that there was no stimulus to develop the hook industry. In the case of the Maori it was far different. There were many kinds of fish he could not obtain by net or trap. Hence he had the incentive to invent. The many kinds of hook of different shapes and sizes, of different materials such as wood, bone, stone, and shell—all go to prove how his inventive faculties were concentrated in this direction. Amongst these are fine examples of barbed hooks. The hooks figured by Linton¹ from the Marquesas have the curve bent in, but there is no barb. Pearl shell hooks with a barb page 316have been obtained from Pukapuka or Danger Island, but European influence is suspected. If there are no barbed hooks in the part of Polynesia from whence the Maori came, it becomes an interesting speculation as to where the Maori and Moriori³ of the Chatham Islands obtained the barb. Maori tradition states that the barb was invented in New Zealand.

Fish traps. The hinahi of Aitutaki has the single-pair twine technique of the Maori hinaki or eel trap, but the shape and the funnel entrance at the top is the form of the Maori taruke or crayfish pot. The horizontal position of the Aitutaki anga is the position of the Maori hinaki, but in its double opening and technique of construction it is totally different. The anga technique is unknown in New Zealand.