272
16 The Context of Oral Traditions
his ancestor. Finding the North Island already well settled, he established a colony
in the South Island. Nearly 600 years after Rakaihautu, Turi, leader of the Aotea
canoe of the Heke, likewise claimed descent from Maui and claimed the land rights
he believed this entailed.
16.7 A Lapita Rat at Orokoroko
Some of the details in the account of Maui’s meeting with the chieftainess of
Orokoroko in Palliser Bay have direct implications for our claim of a Lapita first
settlement of New Zealand. Even the name Orokoroko (“for the very first time”)
suggests it may have been one of the earliest settlements in the North Island. If this
is the case, the discovery in the Washpool Midden of bones of the Pacific rat, Rattus
exulans belonging to haplogroup IIIA, which has a Lapita distribution, might be
seen as confirmation for the possibility that Orokoroko was once a Lapita-age site,
or more probably a secondary colony established from a New Zealand Lapita-age
colony.
As we have reported, Elizabeth Matisoo-Smith and J.H. Robins [11] have studied the mitochondrial DNA of the Pacific rat, Rattus exulans, carried by the Lapita
peoples and their descendants all over the Pacific as a food animal. From study of
the haplogroups of this animal, they have cast new light on the origins and migration sequences of Lapita peoples and their descendants. In a midden in Palliser
Bay, where Maui met the chieftainess of Orokoroko, Matisoo-Smith and Robins
found the bones of a Pacific rat belonging to haplogroup III A. Although late settlement theorists see Eastern Polynesia as the sole source for both Maori and for New
Zealand Pacific rat genes, this rat haplogroup occurs nowhere in Eastern Polynesia.
It occurs only in Lapita colonies in Vanuatu, New Caledonia, Samoa and Fiji and
in Micronesia. Finding this Lapita rat haplogroup in New Zealand could be seen
as archaeological evidence either for a Lapita-age settlement of New Zealand or
for a very early settlement of New Zealand from Western Polynesia. But there is
the additionally interesting fact that the Lapita rat haplotype found in New Zealand
(haplotype 22) differs from that found in the Lapita colonies of Western Polynesia
(haplotype 15). It seems possible from Matisoo-Smith and Robins’ unrooted NJ tree
that haplotype 22 mutated in New Zealand from haplotype 15. If adequate time is
allowed for such a mutation to have independently occurred in New Zealand, this
adds to the likelihood of a very early, probably Lapita-age, introduction of the rat.
Evidence that a Lapita rat haplotype may have undergone mutation in New
Zealand recalls the evidence, discussed in Chapter 5, for a mutation 2,000– 3,000
years ago of the Japanese taro probably in New Zealand. With a chromosome count
of 2n = 42, compared with that of the Eastern Polynesian taro (2n=28), and a different history of diffusion, the presence in New Zealand of the Japanese taro is as
anomalous as the Lapita rat haplogroup in Palliser Bay unless the possibility of a
Lapita-age first settlement is acknowledged and long previous Spice Island contact
with southern Japan seen as the likely source for the New Zealand Japanese variety.
16 The Context of Oral Traditions
his ancestor. Finding the North Island already well settled, he established a colony
in the South Island. Nearly 600 years after Rakaihautu, Turi, leader of the Aotea
canoe of the Heke, likewise claimed descent from Maui and claimed the land rights
he believed this entailed.
16.7 A Lapita Rat at Orokoroko
Some of the details in the account of Maui’s meeting with the chieftainess of
Orokoroko in Palliser Bay have direct implications for our claim of a Lapita first
settlement of New Zealand. Even the name Orokoroko (“for the very first time”)
suggests it may have been one of the earliest settlements in the North Island. If this
is the case, the discovery in the Washpool Midden of bones of the Pacific rat, Rattus
exulans belonging to haplogroup IIIA, which has a Lapita distribution, might be
seen as confirmation for the possibility that Orokoroko was once a Lapita-age site,
or more probably a secondary colony established from a New Zealand Lapita-age
colony.
As we have reported, Elizabeth Matisoo-Smith and J.H. Robins [11] have studied the mitochondrial DNA of the Pacific rat, Rattus exulans, carried by the Lapita
peoples and their descendants all over the Pacific as a food animal. From study of
the haplogroups of this animal, they have cast new light on the origins and migration sequences of Lapita peoples and their descendants. In a midden in Palliser
Bay, where Maui met the chieftainess of Orokoroko, Matisoo-Smith and Robins
found the bones of a Pacific rat belonging to haplogroup III A. Although late settlement theorists see Eastern Polynesia as the sole source for both Maori and for New
Zealand Pacific rat genes, this rat haplogroup occurs nowhere in Eastern Polynesia.
It occurs only in Lapita colonies in Vanuatu, New Caledonia, Samoa and Fiji and
in Micronesia. Finding this Lapita rat haplogroup in New Zealand could be seen
as archaeological evidence either for a Lapita-age settlement of New Zealand or
for a very early settlement of New Zealand from Western Polynesia. But there is
the additionally interesting fact that the Lapita rat haplotype found in New Zealand
(haplotype 22) differs from that found in the Lapita colonies of Western Polynesia
(haplotype 15). It seems possible from Matisoo-Smith and Robins’ unrooted NJ tree
that haplotype 22 mutated in New Zealand from haplotype 15. If adequate time is
allowed for such a mutation to have independently occurred in New Zealand, this
adds to the likelihood of a very early, probably Lapita-age, introduction of the rat.
Evidence that a Lapita rat haplotype may have undergone mutation in New
Zealand recalls the evidence, discussed in Chapter 5, for a mutation 2,000– 3,000
years ago of the Japanese taro probably in New Zealand. With a chromosome count
of 2n = 42, compared with that of the Eastern Polynesian taro (2n=28), and a different history of diffusion, the presence in New Zealand of the Japanese taro is as
anomalous as the Lapita rat haplogroup in Palliser Bay unless the possibility of a
Lapita-age first settlement is acknowledged and long previous Spice Island contact
with southern Japan seen as the likely source for the New Zealand Japanese variety.