Perspectives

Perspectives of the past & their influences

How the Wairau Affray was portrayed amongst communities and in the media at the time was highly contentious, as they carried negative perspectives which laid the blame of the event on Ngāti Toa and Te Rangihaeata's decision to kill the 18 surveyors. As put by Dr Vincent O'Malley, a credible historian with extensive knowledge and academic publishes on Māori and Pākehā relations in the 19th Century, "[The Wairau Affray]'s described as a bloodthirsty, savage, barbaric massacre of… law-abiding settlers." The notion of contrasting roles between Māori and Pākehā in the event: "savagary" and "saintly", was passed down through generations of New Zealanders, leaving a tainted, biased perspective on the Wairau Affray for the older generations, mainly Pākehā, which consequently influenced the discussions and education on the event for young people today.

This biased view was formed mainly due to the social and political power that Pākehā, especially the power The New Zealand Company had and their control of the media at the time, when the Crown had ambitions to fully colonise the country after the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi/ Te Tiriti o Waitangi. Stuff journalist Skara Bohny commented on the ways Pākehā settlers framed Māori as the "savages" in local historical narratives in the article Our Truth, Tā Mātau Pono: The many uncomfortable truths of the Wairau Affray (2023, Feburary 6), "This was the story settlers told about themselves on their arrival and as they built towns and killed Māori who tried to stand in their way: they were the representatives of law and order, Queen and country, taming native "savages" and civilising them, often violently." The New Zealand used these negative languages to imply Māori inferiority compared to Pākehā, justifying their acts of oppression and colonisation for the Pākehā communities settling in Aotearoa.

Furthermore, The New Zealand Company took advantage of the nature of the event and the prejudice existing in the community to use Ngāti Toa as a scapegoat. Skara Bohny commented "The Wairau Affray is one that is ripe for interpretive framing. More settlers were killed than Māori, many of them captives, and the settlers were ostensibly there to arrest Te Rauparaha for arson." The prejudice deeply engrained in colonisation and imperialism that is part of many Pākehā settlers' mindsets, along with the lack of Māori perspectives present in the media created a perfect narrative for The New Zealand Company to lay blame on Māori, to excuse themselves from their share of accountability in the Wairau Affray. And therefore the publishes on the Wairau Affray which framed Ngāti Toa as the accountable side, resonated with many Pākehā and gained traction. The one-sided narratives of the Wairau Affray which are passed down for many generations truly reflects the power imbalance in Māori - Pākehā relations at the time, and how Eurocentrism, which rooted from colonisation, impacted our understanding of the Wairau Affray.

One significant evidence of how Eurocentrism affected the way the public remembered the Wairau Affray is through the memorials and plaques created to acknowledge the event, especially on a local level.

These two plaques (c. 1859) commemorate the settlers and surveyors in Wairau. The first plaque records the day Pākehā surveyers were there to execute "the first survey to be let in Wairau" which contradicts the fact that Ngāti Toa never agreed to sell Wairau, and therefore these surveyers were trespassing - they had no right to be surveying the area. This fact was highlighted in many sources such as newspaper article Original Correspondence and RNZ's documentary NZ Wars: Stories of Wairau. The second plaque honours the "pioneer families of the district", the Pākehā settlers of the region. Both of these plaques did not acknowledge the three iwi that are tangata wheuna of the regions: Rangitāne, Ngāti Apa ki te Rā Tō and Ngāti Kuia, nor is there any plaques nearby which mention the Māori history of the region.

These plaques are significant historical evidence of the ways colonisation influenced the mainstream Eurocentric historical narratives surrounding the Affray, how they are passed down through generations of New Zealanders locally. Ultimately, the commiserations for European settlers, or oppositely, the lack of acknowledgement for Māori on these plaques, can impact locals' knowledge and understanding of the complicated land ownership history in the Wairau region, a significant cause of the Wairau Affray which was usually left out in Eurocentric perspectives.

It is expected that these plaques contains a narrative which praises European settlers for their endeavors, as these plaques were established circa 1859, when the New Zealand Company's main quest was to colonise New Zealand, claim land all over the country, and Māori-Pākehā relations were at its low. But this does not explain the lack of incentive for acknowledgements of the rich Māori history of Wairau today. This shows how Eurocentrism are still rooted in the narratives of Wairau history to this day, through the lack of promotion of Māori history or updated historical information in the Wairau region.

This is the Wairau Affray memorial for the 22 surveyor who died in the event, located in the Tuamarina cemetery; the memorial was established in March 1869. The wording on the memorial says "Sacred to the memory of [those who lost their lives] who were killed near this spot by natives of New Zealand on 17th June 1843." There are also no mention of the 4 to 9 Māori deaths of the event, including Te Rongo. This wording implies that Ngāti Apa's act was a cold-blooded and malicious, reinforcing the idea that the event was a one-sided massacre which resulted with Pākehā as the harmed. Credible historian Vincent O'Malley quote backs up this idea: "So [the memorial] is really a monument to those Europeans who died, and it reflected that kind of view that what took place here was a massacre — the Wairau Massacre it was referred to as for more than a century."

This memorial is significant because it shows the ways Pākehā controlled the narratives of the Wairau Affray in the past, how the remains of this perspective are still visible today, and the effects of Eurocentric mindsets on Pākehā's response in the past, and the public's understanding of the Wairau Affray today. With how prominent the memorial is in the Tuamarina Cemetary, at the time of establishment, the memorial was symbolic to Pākehā settlers, not only as a place to commiserate the Europeans that lost their lives, but also as symbol of colonial power in Aotearoa at the time, how the New Zealand Company twisted the narratives of a horrible event to one that would benefit the colonial forces.

Te Rauparaha's account of the Wairau Affray

One of the most important voices of the Wairau Affray, Te Rauparaha's Account of the Wairau Affray from the history encyclopaedia The Prow offers a look into Ngāti Toa's perspective of the conflict. The detail which stands out the most in Te Rauparaha's account of the Wairau Affray was the mention of peaceful responses to The New Zealand Company's unauthorised surveys in the Wairau Valley. He said:

"We told the surveyors not to work any more and go away; that we would not allow them to do anything more till we were paid for our land but they took no notice of us."

The most significant cause which lead to the Wairau Affray was the conflicting land deals between The New Zealand Company and Māori of the Wairau region. In this case, The New Zealand Company believed that they purchased the Wairau Valley, but Ngāti Toa disagrees, and hence there was retaliation from the iwi. Te Rauparaha's Account of the Wairau Affray shows that there was a significant and valid reason for Ngāti Toa's response to the lack of consideration The New Zealand Company had for their land rights, especially after being told multiple times that they were not allowed in the region to survey. However, many sources at the time framed this response as one of mischief and savagery, hence the majority of the public at the time believed that Ngāti Toa should be reprimanded for it. The overpowering narratives against Te Rauparaha's account shows the power of Eurocentric media at the time, and how The New Zealand Company took advantage of the lack of powerful media platform for Māori compared to Pākehā to reshape the narrative and lay blame on Ngāti Toa, simply for protecting their land. This ultimately took a role on the Eurocentric narrative which influenced the public's perception of the Wairau Affray, in the past and today.

Austin, S. (2020, April). Te Rauparaha's Account of the Wairau Affray - Maori. The Prow.

Contrasting opinions at the time

The Wairau Affray was considered a highly contentious event since it had occurred, despite the Eurocentric news coverage of the time. An example of this is the newspaper article Original Correspondence (1843, September 16.) which suggested that the New Zealand Company's account of the Wairau Affray was one of propoganda; that they have left out crucial facts about the validity of the land purchase of Wairau, Te Rauparaha's response, both are crucial to understand the reasons that lead to the Wairau Affray. This is echoed in contemporary sources such as Skara Bohny's article Our Truth, Tā Mātau Pono: The many uncomfortable truths of the Wairau Affray. "...the commonly remembered details of the skirmish do not include many mitigating factors that change the tone of the events that day." This article from Daily Southern Cross is significant as it offers a rare perspective at the time which supported Ngāti Toa and called out the New Zealand Company for manipulating the narrative of the event using their powerful media platforms.

Marlborough Museum Executive Director Steve Austin offered an explanation to this difference in mindsets amongst locals: "The sensible and educated people of Nelson saw the attacking party as the hot heads that they were, as they understood confrontation and vigilante violence were wrong (and would create more problems) and the matters were before the courts and should have been allowed to run their course through the legal system." This suggests that even between Pākehā, opinions on the Wairau Affray were vast and contrasting, which reaffirms the complexity of perspectives on Wairau Affray amongst a community.

Daily Southern Cross. (1843, September 16). Original Correspondence. Daily Southern Cross, 3.

Education on the Wairau Affray:

Another way that European colonists control the narrative of contested New Zealand historical events was through education, or the lack thereof. Many people, especially the older generations, reported that they were not taught about the the Wairau Affray at school. Or even if they were taught about it, it was likely that the content was extremely Eurocentric. Liana McDonald (Ngāti Kuia, Rangitāne o Wairau), sociologist and former lecturer at Victoria University of Wellington talked about her lack of knowledge on the Wairau Affray as a Māori local. "Although I grew up in Blenheim, [...] I actually learned very little about the battle and the events surrounding [The Wairau Affray], growing up." Aunty Margie and Uncle Timi (Ngāti Kuia), expressed the same sentiment about their experience at school in the past: "We never learned about the Māori Wars at school. They taught us all about Waterloo and all of those big wars over in other places but they never taught us about the Māori Wars." Uncle Timi also talked about the cultural oppression that was an integral part of New Zealand's education system at the time: "No-one [at school] spoke to me much about the massacre. We all kept quiet because we weren't allowed to speak Māori." These experiences reflects the way Eurocentrism, which perpetuated New Zealand society as a direct result of colonisation, negatively impacted the history taught in New Zealand's education system. These are all attempts of cultural oppression and cultural cleansing, for British colonists to assert soft power over Māori communities.

Hone, the marae manager for Ngāti Kuia talked about his experiences learning about the Wairau Affray from a Eurocentric perspective at school: "Hone's own history teacher at school told the class that the Wairau was lost because Te Rauparaha had killed a whole lot of Europeans and the Māoris (sic.) had lost all their land." This is a prime example of how prejudiced views against Māori in the Wairau Affray, a result of Eurocentric media and narratives passed down through generations of New Zealanders, spread untrue facts about the Wairau Affray and therefore may impact people's perception of the events.

To this day, the cultural oppression and biased historical perspectives on the Wairau Affray that were taught at schools still have a great impact on people's knowledge and understanding of the Affray. Dr Lloyd Carpenter (Ngāti Toa), who has vast academic knowledge and ancestral connections from the Wairau Affray gave an example of how views on the Wairau Affray are still extremely polarised. "Last year I did a seminar [on the Affray] in Nelson and Blenheim, and my inbox filled up with people saying 'you're trying to justify savagery'" The negative responses from Nelson and Blenheim locals, which are predominately Pākehā, is one of many evidence of the long-lasting effects of Eurocentrism in New Zealand historical narratives, both academically and colloquially, on the public's understanding of contested events such as the Wairau Affray.

Contemporary views on the Wairau Affray

The name of the event

The impressions and knowledge of a person on a historical event starts from the name of the event - what they now it as. This idea is especially applicable to the the way the skirmish at Wairau was referred as throughout history.

Initially introduced as the Wairau Massacre in news articles such as Supplement to The Nelson Examiner and New Zealand Chronicle (1843, December 28), the use of the noun "Massacre" was meant to create an negative impression towards the public, which victimised Pākehā settlers and blamed Ngāti Toa for the loss in the Wairau Affray. This negative impression was further backed up by the comments within the article: "Her Majesty's representative [...] have been massacred by an armed body of natives, after an unsuccessful attempt to execute a warrant against two of their chiefs", which as described by Dr Vincent O'Malley, was an attempt to "capture the narrative — 'We innocently went over. We wanted to follow the law. 'We try to arrest these chiefs, and they start shooting and then kill unarmed prisoners.'" According to New Zealand encyclopaedia Te Ara, The Nelson Examiner was a newspaper run by the New Zealand Company. This explains the Eurocentric bias in the article as The New Zealand Company would try to use their platform to defend themselves, spread the propoganda and control the way Pākehā settlers view the event. At the same time, this article represents one out of many powerful platforms that European colonists have to represent themselves to the public, compared to Māori perspectives which are mostly passed down through oral history.

Over time, with the acknowledgement of New Zealand's Eurocentric historical narrative, and society's understanding of racial issues, the phrases used to describe the event changed, from "Massacre" to "Incident," and eventually "Affray." The display in Marlborough Museum, the NZHistory article The Wairau incident and the timeline of the Wairau Affray provided by Blair Walker are also examples of how the public's discussions on the event has been changing in recent times. All listed sources refer to the event as the "Wairau Incident." Additionally with Walker's timeline, "Wairau Incident" was crossed out and replaced with "Wairau Affray," most likely to keep the content up to date for educational purposes.

Liana McDonald talked about how Wairau Affray was remembered through time, and how the small changes in the name of the event represents a bigger societal mindset shift. "[...] I could remember that the name kept changing as I grew up in the region and moved back and forth during university breaks. From the Wairau 'Massacre' to an 'Incident', and then to an 'Affray', which is perhaps testament to the slow acceptance of Blenheim's predominantly Pākehā community that the British and settler militia were in the wrong that day." The changes in how academia and the public referred to this event is significant as it shows the shift in perspective on the Wairau Affray, how a large portion of Aotearoa communities are more critical of the actions and disputed land deals of the New Zealand Company, and the harms of colonisation on Māori land ownership.

However, the name changes was not received well by everyone, especially the older generations who was accustomed to a Eurocentric perspective of the event which blamed Ngāti Toa. This view was expressed by James R Eyles: local resident and the person who discovered some of the first archeological artefacts at Wairau Bar: "The controversial title of the Wairau Massacre has been sanities over the years by various authors and others, mainly to excuse both races from condemnation of unruly behaviour." He implied that the different names for the event minimised the accountability from both sides of the event and did not address the details of the event. This comment matches up with the idea James [who he is] in source Shifting perspectives about colonial conflict: The Wairau Affray and The Battle of Boulcott's Farm which mentioned that the word "massacre" was used by "the generation who are now in the 80s, 90s, hundreds who were taught the true definition of a massacre." Eyle's opinion did not consider the fact that the word "massacre" was first used by Pākehā for the events at Wairau to lay blame on Ngāti Toa, ignoring the causes leading up to the event. Therefore, to call the event the "Wairau Massacre" is not fully representative of the blurred nature of the event. Eyles' stance on this matter represents one that a large part of the older generation of New Zealanders, showing the how Eurocentric historical perspectives reinforces the idea that the event's main problem was the death of Pākehā and not the underlying factors considering land rights leading up to it. This greatly impacted the way many people understood the Wairau Affray.

Nelson Examiner and New Zealand Chronicle. (1843, December 23). Supplement to Nelson Examiner and New Zealand Chronicle.

Fry, S. (2023, March 2). Photo of a display on Wairau Incident in Marlborough Museum [Museum display]. Marlborough Museum, Blenheim, New Zealand.

Fry, S. (2023, March 2). Photo of the timeline of the Wairau Affray, provided by Blair Walker [Timeline display]. Blenheim, New Zealand.

Remembering the Wairau Affray

Dang, N. (2023, March 2). Photo of The Wairau Affray, 1843 [Information board]. Tuamarina river, Blenheim, New Zealand.

The contemporary public's view on the Wairau Affray has changed significantly and rapidly throughout the years, with the acknowledgement and reparations of the cultural consequences of colonisation in New Zealand society. The Wairau Affray information board at the site of the event (Marlborough Museum, c. 2009) stated that "The New Zealand Company need this area because they had no more land for British settlers who had already been offered land." In our visit to the Tua Marina river on 2nd March 2023, the word "needed" was crossed off the board and replaces with the word "wanted," implying that the word "needed" when used in context is downplaying the land rights of tangata whenua; as colonisers who came to Aotearoa with a mission to colonise the country, Pākehā does not need Māori land, they wanted to acquire the land and take advantage of the resources out of greed and political ambition.

The intentions behind this action is to highlight the existing Eurocentric narrative which is still dominant in contemporary historiography. At the same time, the push back is significant as it shows the prominant changes in many people's view on the Wairau Affray, now with a more unbiased lens which considered both Pākehā and Māori perspectives. In a larger scale, the shift in perspectives of the Wairau Affray represents a larger movement towards the decolonisation of historical narratives on Aotearoa history encouraging people to challenge past ideologies.

Additionally, this board was designed and researched as part of a collaboration between senior students of Tuamarina School, and the Marlborough Museum. The involvement of students in the creation of this board is significant as the Wairau community is committed to educate the young generations on significant local historical events in a progressive and interactive environment. It exemplifies the positive changes that New Zealand education is making, to acknowledge the harmful Eurocentric perspectives of the past and help young people understand New Zealand history from an unbiased point of view. Most importantly, this is the start of the changes towards mending the impacts of the mainstream, Eurocentric historical narrative of New Zealand history.

Even though the Wairau Affray is arguably one of the most significant Māori-Pākehā conflict in New Zealand history, not many people, including locals, know about the events and the heritage that was part of the event. The picture shows the pathway leading down to the Tītoki tree - the only remaining evidence from the Wairau Affray, the tree in which a waka was tied onto to create a pathway for the surveyors to cross the Tuamarina river onto Ngāti Toa's side. This pathway is not visible nor it is well-maintained for the public to see and access. The Tītoki site was covered by bushes and barbed wire fence, hidden from the main road with only a small board to recognize the location of the tree.

The lack of access to the Tītoki tree may reflect a cultural hierarchy system amongst heritage sites around New Zealand. The Tītoki tree of the Wairau Affray is a good introduction towards the event for visitors and locals alike. But because it is not easily accessible to the public for educational purposes, it limits the outreach of historical information on the Wairau Affray, meaning that New Zealanders are likely to lack knowledge on the Wairau Affray and the heritage sites associated with it. This lack of adequate introduction of important local history for the public at the Tītoki tree site is an evidence of the persisting issue with New Zealand's Eurocentric historical focal point - which was affected by years of oppression Māori generations had to endure, and how it may limit the public's understanding of Aotearoa history.

However, this anonymity around the Tītoki tree site may have been to protect the historical site from unethical metal detecting works for profit, as Blair Walker mentioned in his presentation: "It's predominantly, I think, [the locals] to try and keep people out a little bit [...] because there's a lot of metal detecting and stuff would go along, on down here. And it wasn't actually that long ago, we turned up to do a session here and there were people metal detecting, and we told them, 'You're not allowed to do that.'" It is a justifiable reason as the hidden aspect of the tree will preserve a scene and prevent the profitisation of a historically significant event, a wahi tapu which saw the deaths of many people, both Pākehā and Māori.

Historiography and the significance of perspectives on the Wairau Affray

James, D. (2018, June 4). Time to look back at the Wairau Affray with 'compassionate mindset'. Stuff.

Macdonald, L. (2021). Local students learning about the history of the Wairau Region, including the Wairau Affray. [Photo]. Retrieved from Stuff.co.nz

The dispute around the Wairau Affray is one of the greatest examples of how the power of imperialism and Eurocentrism affected the public's understanding of New Zealand history. But more importantly, the changes in how people are viewing and talking about the Wairau Affray today are reflective of the progress that historians, educators and communities around Aotearoa are striving towards: to challenge the outdated narratives on New Zealand history and mend the deep scars that generations of Māori endured as a result of the cultural oppression and discrimination the Crown imposed on them.

The Wairau Affray is Steve Austin, the executive director of Marlborough Museum commented on the contrasting interpretations of the Wairau Affray and how it reflects the complex of historiography on contested events:

"History isn't always tidy and convenient. And that's the great thing about humankind, is that there are always new ways to interpret the facts of the past, and to look at these kinds of historical events with a compassionate mindset."

Austin's assessment on the complexity of understanding a historical event represents the impacts of Eurocentrism on our understanding of local history. In the past, the mainstream New Zealand history narrative was written and spread by Pākehā settlers, who had evident prejudice against Māori, wanting to assert dominance over tangata whenua through their attempt to oppress Māori voices and culture, an example of soft power. Today, there are extensive research and resources on disputed events in New Zealand history, which are more inclusive and representative towards Māori voices. But more importantly, Aotearoa as a society are more educated on New Zealand history, the wrongdoings of Pākehā settlers after the signing of The Treaty of Waitangi/ Te Tiriti o Waitangi, and the irreversible impacts that oppressive acts from colonisation left for many Māori generations.

There is a considerable effort within the last few years to revisit and reassess the narratives of Aotearoa disputed historical events over Māori-Pākehā relations in education. The Aotearoa New Zealand History curriculum, implemented from Term 1 of the 2023, is one current example of the attempts to repair the discrimination in the portrayal of Māori in local history - by educating young people, the new generation of the country about local history in the most unbiased ways, stripped of the previous one-sided narratives.

Page updated

Report abuse