274
16 The Context of Oral Traditions
16.9 Evidence for an Early First Settlement
from Language Divergence
Directly related to our claim for a Lapita-age first settlement of New Zealand, is
Beattie’s mention of a language divergence existing between Maui and the chieftainess. Both the Ngati-hau and Ngapuhi, North Island, accounts (recorded in John
White’s The Ancient History of the Maori [15]) tell also of the technological
impoverishment of the Orokoroko people compared with Maui’s people.
There is one comparable instance of long-term linguistic isolation in Polynesian
prehistory, that of Rapanui (Easter Island). Accounts are given of the linguistic distance of Rapanui speech from Eastern Polynesian by two early European visitors,
Captain James Cook in 1774 and Hugh Cuming of the schooner The Discoverer in
1827. Steven Roger Fischer, discussing a manuscript recording Cuming’s visit [16],
comments:
Of singular linguistic interest is the comment (MS p.9) that the ‘Pomotian’ (Paumotuan,
later form: Tuamotuan) on board the Discoverer was quite unable to hold conversation with
the Rapanui, although he could understand ‘a few words they spoke.’ The only similar
linguistic experiment on Rapanui at such an early date was that by Cook in 1774, evidently
with similar futility.
Fischer adds in a footnote (p. 312) “Cook in 1774 (1777: 1: 278) notes that the
language of the first Rapanui to board ‘was, in a manner, wholly unintelligible to all
of us’ and also to their official translator, Otiti (whom Fischer tells us was actually
Mahine, a minor chief of the Society Islands), who, Cook continues (p. 293) ‘understood their language much better than any of us, though even he understood it but
very imperfectly’.”
If Easter Island were first settled in AD 400, as Fischer suggests, there would
be a time gap of 1,374 years from first settlement to Cook’s arrival and 1,427 years
to that of The Discoverer. It is possible, however, that the Easter Island’s isolation
was not absolute throughout this period. Evidence from genealogies suggests that
Hotu Matua’s settlement was secondary and occurred during the Medieval Climatic
Optimum. Katherine Routledge claims that there is evidence from Mangarevan tradition of Hotu Matua’s departure for Easter Island in this period from Mangareva
[17]. There would undoubtedly have been some later Eastern Polynesian linguistic
input from this migration and perhaps also from the visit of Tangi’ia, who, according
to Rarotongan tradition [18] perhaps about AD 1294, sought his adopted son there.
We note that if recent arguments for a primary, as opposed to a secondary, colonization of Easter Island in the Medieval Climatic Optimum [19] are given credence, the
linguistic divergence recorded above would be anomalous.
In comparison to these gaps of 1,374 and 1,427 years, there is, by our estimate,
a gap of perhaps 1,500 years between a Lapita-age first settlement of New Zealand
and Maui’s visit at about AD 100 (see Chapter 20). From climatic evidence there
were probably 600 years of total isolation during that time in which long-distance
voyaging to New Zealand would not have been possible and another 400 years of
relative isolation before Maui’s visit. The situations of New Zealand and Easter
16 The Context of Oral Traditions
16.9 Evidence for an Early First Settlement
from Language Divergence
Directly related to our claim for a Lapita-age first settlement of New Zealand, is
Beattie’s mention of a language divergence existing between Maui and the chieftainess. Both the Ngati-hau and Ngapuhi, North Island, accounts (recorded in John
White’s The Ancient History of the Maori [15]) tell also of the technological
impoverishment of the Orokoroko people compared with Maui’s people.
There is one comparable instance of long-term linguistic isolation in Polynesian
prehistory, that of Rapanui (Easter Island). Accounts are given of the linguistic distance of Rapanui speech from Eastern Polynesian by two early European visitors,
Captain James Cook in 1774 and Hugh Cuming of the schooner The Discoverer in
1827. Steven Roger Fischer, discussing a manuscript recording Cuming’s visit [16],
comments:
Of singular linguistic interest is the comment (MS p.9) that the ‘Pomotian’ (Paumotuan,
later form: Tuamotuan) on board the Discoverer was quite unable to hold conversation with
the Rapanui, although he could understand ‘a few words they spoke.’ The only similar
linguistic experiment on Rapanui at such an early date was that by Cook in 1774, evidently
with similar futility.
Fischer adds in a footnote (p. 312) “Cook in 1774 (1777: 1: 278) notes that the
language of the first Rapanui to board ‘was, in a manner, wholly unintelligible to all
of us’ and also to their official translator, Otiti (whom Fischer tells us was actually
Mahine, a minor chief of the Society Islands), who, Cook continues (p. 293) ‘understood their language much better than any of us, though even he understood it but
very imperfectly’.”
If Easter Island were first settled in AD 400, as Fischer suggests, there would
be a time gap of 1,374 years from first settlement to Cook’s arrival and 1,427 years
to that of The Discoverer. It is possible, however, that the Easter Island’s isolation
was not absolute throughout this period. Evidence from genealogies suggests that
Hotu Matua’s settlement was secondary and occurred during the Medieval Climatic
Optimum. Katherine Routledge claims that there is evidence from Mangarevan tradition of Hotu Matua’s departure for Easter Island in this period from Mangareva
[17]. There would undoubtedly have been some later Eastern Polynesian linguistic
input from this migration and perhaps also from the visit of Tangi’ia, who, according
to Rarotongan tradition [18] perhaps about AD 1294, sought his adopted son there.
We note that if recent arguments for a primary, as opposed to a secondary, colonization of Easter Island in the Medieval Climatic Optimum [19] are given credence, the
linguistic divergence recorded above would be anomalous.
In comparison to these gaps of 1,374 and 1,427 years, there is, by our estimate,
a gap of perhaps 1,500 years between a Lapita-age first settlement of New Zealand
and Maui’s visit at about AD 100 (see Chapter 20). From climatic evidence there
were probably 600 years of total isolation during that time in which long-distance
voyaging to New Zealand would not have been possible and another 400 years of
relative isolation before Maui’s visit. The situations of New Zealand and Easter