|
Skip to comments |
Skip to comment form |
 Skip
to this weeks poll |
Send to friend
21 January
06
History
in the Making
Printer
friendly version (PDF) 
View >>>
New Zealand
history is full of
contradictions. In the very week that the government launched
their $1 million road show to educate the public about the
“official” history of
New Zealand
and the importance of the Treaty of Waitangi, a
UK
based group released a different interpretation of world
history (see the Economist).
Gavin
Menzies and his 1421 Team presented new evidence of early
Chinese exploration by Zheng He, strengthening their belief
that Chinese colonies existed in
New Zealand
for hundreds of years before the arrival of Maori.
While
our government appears to hold tightly onto the view that
Maori are tangata whenua (with even the stories of the early
Moriori occupation that our generation was taught in school
having almost disappeared), local and international research
is now painting a different picture of the early history of
New Zealand
.
Claims
have been made that
New Zealand
enjoyed waves of exploration from as early as 600BC by
Phoenician, Indian, Greek and Arab voyagers. In fact, claims
of these visits help to explain the existence in the
South Island
of the fossilised remains of rats that have been carbon dated
at 160 BC - more than 1,000 years before Maori!
There
are further claims that before Maori arrived in
New Zealand
settlements had already been established, by the Waitaha, the
peace-loving fair skinned ancestors of the Moriori, by Chinese
miners, and by the Celts.
The
testing of Maori DNA – a technique that is now frequently
used in historical research - would go a long way towards
confirming or refuting these claims, but sadly, many Maori
appear to be opposed to it’s use. In fact, last July, the
Herald reported on the unwillingness of Maori to participate
in the National Geographic’s Genographic Project. This
ambitious project aims to use DNA analysis to help explain how
the ancestors of indigenous people moved out of
Africa
60,000 years ago to spread across the globe. But the response
from many Maori groups has been lukewarm, with their concern
focusing on: “What’s in it for indigenous people? What’s
the point of challenging generations of oral history and
spiritual belief?”
Should
evidence of pre-Maori colonization be discovered, the
ramifications would be obvious. In the words of historian Dr
James Belich, the greatest dread of historians is to discover
an artifact or skeleton “which would invalidate the
research of decades”.
As
a result of his investigations, Gavin Menzies is sure that the
early Chinese played a far more significant part in our
history than we realise. He would like to be given permission
to DNA test some early human remains. He says, “The
New Zealand Government posses several skeletons carbon dated
to centuries before the Maori claimed to have reached the
North and
South
Islands
. These skeletons should have their DNA examined. I have
approached the leading expert (at
Cambridge
University
) and he agreed to carry out this examination. However
we need the consent of the
New Zealand
government who, as may be expected, have passed the buck by
saying we need Maori consent".
Of
further concern are claims that officialdom is making historic
investigation nigh on impossible. If discoveries are on
Department of Conservation land it is apparently
extraordinarily difficult to gain permission to carry out
scientific analysis. In cases where the discoveries include
ancient human remains, it appears that rather than allowing
carbon dating and DNA testing, the normal protocol (as Gavin
Menzies and many others have found), is to return the material
to local iwi for disposal.
This
process poses two ironies. Firstly, when it is claimed that
the remains are not of Maori descent, iwi should have no prior
right of access or possession. Secondly, it would be a tragic
twist of fate if people conquered, enslaved and killed by
Maori were given back to Maori, thus preventing the detail of
their background and history from ever being discovered.
In
fact, as a matter of standard protocol, such remains should be held in Museums - as the safest and most appropriate place -
until the origins and dates are clearly established.
The
refusal of the government to cooperate over DNA testing of
human remains is a huge contradiction. Such an isolationist
attitude is in complete contrast to the Prime Minister’s
stance this week with regard to building closer trade
relations with the
United States
. One would think that the answers to the unsolved mysteries
of mankind would lay in greater international cooperation not
less, just as the PM has now finally realised that
New Zealand
’s future prosperity depends on closer economic relations
with our international trading partners.
Opening
one’s eyes to international trade yet closing one’s eyes
to international history is contradiction that has not yet
been put to the government at a political or fourth estate
level. Just as the public would show immense hostility to the
censorship of current news, so it should also be revolted by
the censorship of historical record. If we live in the open
and free society we like to presume, then all opinions should
have an opportunity to be aired, considered and either
accepted or rejected.
Useful websites:
http://www.tepapa.govt.nz
http://www.1421.tv
http://www.celticnz.co.nz
http://www.zealand.org.nz
Printer
friendly version (PDF)
View >>>
This
weeks poll. Do
you
believe the government should allow ancient human remains to
be DNA tested.
To take part in our online poll
>>>
Skip to top |
Skip to comment form |
Skip
to this weeks poll |
Send to friend
Your
Comments:
Reader's
comments will be posted on the NZCPD Forum page click
to view >>>.
|
