Wayne Ryburn: Article 2 - Exposing History Curriculum Myths

This is the second of a series of eight articles exposing some of the myths about New Zealand's History, now being taught to secondary school students. 

The Level 5 workbook for Year 10 students on the "Treaty of Waitangi - Te Tiriti o Waitangi" was published and has been in use since 2014. The page numbers and headings in the text are referenced throughout the series of articles. 

Some aspects, especially on the Taranaki and Waikato wars, are also re-taught in greater depth in the History curriculum at Year 13.

The series of articles was written as a critique to the editor of ESA publications, Jo Crichton and the author of the text book, F J Gibson. This critique was sent in October last year - to date there has been no reply.

ARTICLE 2 - EXPOSING HISTORY CURRICULUM MYTHS 

The 1^st Myth: That the Treaty of Waitangi created a partnership between the Crown and iwi, and issues on what makes a treaty. Also how students are misled over the real reasons for having a treaty.

 Pg 12 What is a Treaty?.

The Act of Union is poorly explained and used incorrectly to equate it with the Treaty of Waitangi. The 1707 Act of Union united two independent kingdoms, England and Scotland, who shared the same monarch. The important part was that succession to the throne had to be a Protestant heir, and not to be a Roman Catholic.

Scotland was represented in Parliament proportionally in both the House of Lords (32 peers) and House of Commons (100 MPs).

In April 1746 a rebellion, led by the pretender Charles Stuart, son of James II, was heavily defeated by the British army at the Battle of Culloden, Scotland. The rebels aimed to restore a Catholic king to the throne. Consequently many Scottish Catholic clans were stripped of their lands and powers. Feudal lords previously had judicial and military powers over followers who swore allegiance to clan leaders. This Jacobite uprising was seen as an act of treason against the Crown, and it led to the end of the semi-independant Scottish clan system, and finally integrated the Scottish Highlands into the United Kingdom.

Prisoners were put on trial for high treason and many were executed, especially clan leaders who led the rebellion. Clan chiefs had estates forfeited (confiscated) to the Crown and later sold off. Prisoners were sent to American colonies.

This is similar to what happened in New Zealand during the Land Wars of 1864, due to the Kingitanga rebellion, however no executions took place and its leaders were left alone in the “King Country”.

Pg 13 A nation's flag

The flag depicted is inaccurate as it is not the present union flag of the UK. The union flag shown on page 13 is from 1606, first used by James I as he was monarch. It is believed this is where the name Union Jack comes from - named after Jacobus, the Latin name for James. Unsurprisingly many students and teachers using the text did not realize that the flag depicted is not the current union flag of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

The Union Jack, used in NZ from 1840 – 1902, contains the flags of England (St George), Scotland (St Andrew) and Ireland (St Patrick). It differs from that used in 1706 when union of the two kingdoms occurred.

It was the Act of Union in 1801, between Great Britain and Ireland that led to the current British flag, also part of New Zealand’s flag.

The Union came about following the Irish rebellion of 1798. Both Protestants and Catholics wanted parliamentary reforms with universal male suffrage, and Catholics to be given emancipation (the right to vote). The rebellion was brutally suppressed, and led to the abolition of the Irish Parliament which had sat in Dublin. Proportional representation meant 100 Protestant MPs and 32 Peers went to Westminster in London. Catholic emancipation finally eventuated in 1829.

Pg 15-18 Four sections ask for information on the following topics, they include; Whalers, Missionaries, The Musket wars and the Declaration of Independence.

The section asks students to do a scaffolding essay on why a treaty was needed by the British. No other reasons, except the above, are mentioned,for having such a treaty!

The Musket Wars. These were a series of internecine tribal conflicts, largely brought about by the introduction of muskets. Depending on sources, anywhere between 20-40,000 Maori lost their lives during the 1810 - 1840 period. This text fails to mention that tapu (sacred) and utu (revenge) – were two Maori concepts strongly enforced by their chiefs - were the main causes. Both cannibalism and slavery were a part of Maori society at this time. Neither of these are mentioned in the text nor in the video clips that students are requested to view. They have been “white washed”  or simply sanitised out of our history. Large scale slaughter of men, women and children often took place. Both slavery and cannibalism ended when NZ became a British colony in 1840 following the signing of The Treaty of Waitangi. It is worth noting that;

a)     In the Waikato, following the fall of Matakitaki Pa in 1822, at least a thousand were killed with hundreds taken as slaves by Ngapuhi. This number was in excess of total casualties inflicted by British forces in the 1863-4 Waikato campaign.

b)     In Northern Taranaki in 1832, the slaughter of Te Atiawa prisoners by Waikato was far greater than the casualties inflicted by the Crown in the Taranaki campaign of 1860-63. This was utu (revenge) for the defeat of Waikato in 1822 at Pukerangiora. The result of the 1832 retaliatory conflict saw Te Atiawa and other tribes dispersed to the area around Wellington.

(Read Ron Crosby, “The Forgotten Wars” for further information).

The period from 1820-1837 was a fearful period. Many Maori chiefs decreed an end to this conflict, wanting peace and order to be restored. This was a major reason for many wanting settlers to live among them and for signing the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840, with the British bringing law and order to NZ. During tribal war expeditions, usually no quarter was given; men, women and children were indiscriminately killed, sometimes prisoners were taken, to be enslaved, or later eaten.

Pg15-18

Two important points need to be made on, why a treaty was wanted, which are excluded  from the paragraph. 1. The need to indicate to the international order of the time that Britain had secured sovereignty, ( Putting a stop to French interests, which was strong,warships were in the area after 1837. Akaroa was established as a French colony in 1840 with intent to purchase more of the South Island).2. The interest of groups like the NZ Company in purchasing land to settle with people from Britain. This forced the British governments hand in securing sovereignty to control the settlement process as no legal process existed in NZ.

Pg 19-21 The Treaty of Waitangi 1840. Both English and Maori versions are given, plus English translation, for students to compare over these two pages.

There was much conflict over the choice of words used in writing up the Treaty . For instance there was no Maori word for “sovereignty”, so “kawanatanga” was used instead by Henry Williams. There had been treaties made between European powers and Indigenous peoples since the 16th century. There was never any notion of co-governance. A treaty would simply acknowledge the rights of indigenous peoples and their cessation of sovereignty.

Bain Attwood in “Empire and the Making Native Title”, 2020, states that the treaty was mainly diplomatic, to convince chiefs to agree to cede sovereignty as third parties (French) were keen to establish themselves and acquire land in New Zealand. The treaty was poorly written, especially in its translation , reconfirming what was stated by Ruth Ross in the NZ Journal of History in 1972 as a “carelessly written, poorly and ambiguously translated and ill thought out treaty. To persist in postulating that it was a sacred contract is sheer hypocrisy”.

Modernists, led by Claudia Orange, have tried to claim that there were legal and moral precepts that the Crown failed to uphold. This has been done largely to recast the myth in “terms of present day sensibilities”. Whereby today's values and perspectives with ideological moralizing are imposed on the Past.

In the first draft of the Treaty, Hobson gave no such guarantee that Maori would keep possession of their lands, forests etc. It was the missionary Williams who put this clause into the Treaty. Apparently his choice of words was not the best, in his translation of the Treaty into Maori.

Words such as “Mana” or “rangatiratanga” were not considered to be appropriate to use in translating how sovereignty could be transferred. Instead he used the word “kawanatanga” or governorship, which was more widely understood, thus rights of sovereignty were deemed to be called “kawanatanga - governorship”. Eg Maori chiefs who had been to New South Wales and had met the Governor there. The debate that followed by Maori was over having a ’governor’. No other articles were discussed at the signing.

In the second article, “rangatiratanga” was used by Williams, due to his understanding of chieftainship - the main power in Maori society. For Williams, it was important that the Crown  protect Maori from the evils that colonisation would bring, as settlers would not be accountable to missionaries. Chiefs  were not denied their tribal responsibilities, just those of national significance. They understood that in the future laws of the Governor would be alike for both Maori and settlers. As Sir Hugh Kawharu  restated in 1975 that the Maori version “gave absolutely to the Queen of England for ever the complete government of their land.”

For more, read Michael Belgrave “Historical Frictions, Maori Claims and Reinvented Histories”.

Following the Treaty in 1840, New Zealand became part of New South Wales, and did not become a separate Crown colony until 3 May, 1841. In 1852 another important founding document for New Zealand came as democracy was created with the passing of the NZ Constitution Act, whereby a system of provinces and a central government was established. Finally in 1858 the English Laws Act enabled all laws of England to be adopted by the colony of New Zealand.

Wayne Ryburn, an Auckland University graduate, with a thesis on the history of the Kaipara, “Tall Spars, Steamers and Gum”, has been a social science teacher for nearly 50  years.