I can hear the outrage building now

Stuff.co.nz

A new book is seriously going to bend some Maori out of shape. I can;t wait for the headlines expressing outrage over this book.

I wonder if the Egyptians had any kaitiakitanga?

Captain James Cook and Abel Tasman could lose their place in history as the first Europeans to reach New Zealand.

A controversial book, To the End of the Earth, claims to contain evidence that Greeks, Spanish and Egyptians settled in New Zealand long before the Maori people.

The 378-page book, to be released this weekend, was co-authored by researchers Maxwell C Hill, Gary Cook and Noel Hilliam.

It shows ancient maps drawn before the birth of Christ, which the authors said detail the coastlines of Australia and New Zealand.

Skeletons, rock carvings, stone buildings and monuments all attest to people of European origin living in New Zealand for centuries before the arrival of Polynesians, they said.

The artefacts include a rock carving of an ancient Greek ship found in Taupo, a stone pillar with an accurate coastal map of New Zealand showing Lake Taupo in its pre-232AD eruption shape, and carvings on rocks at Raglan.

Hill said a huge boulder weighing several tonnes, deeply cut into a huge circular star calendar and marked with what were believed to be figures and rebuses, was the most stunning find.

He said there was also evidence that showed Maui was not the legendary Maori god-explorer, but an actual Egyptian naval navigator, who steered a flotilla of Greek ships to discover new shores, Hill said.

The book quotes Professor Barry Fell, of Harvard University in the US, who interpreted graffiti drawn on limestone in caves at McCluer Bay, on the coast of Indonesia.

Hill said Fell’s find names Maui as a navigator from the Red Sea under the flag of Ptolemy III in 232BC.

A cave inscription near Santiago, Chile also shows the Maori god-explorer was an Egyptian navigator, saying the point was “the southern limit of the coast reached by Maui,” Hill said.

 

Please support Whaleoil.
Click Here
to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

Be part of making sure Whaleoil's voice continues.

  • Pete George

    Even if there are some facts in the book I don’t know what the big deal is. Maori could be 100% Athenian descent but it wouldn’t change anything apart from a bit of what we know about history.

    • Xlsports

      agreed. it doesnt change the parties to thr TofW and its obligations

    • Michael

       The big deal is that it challenges the whole “First Peoples” premise and dilutes the weight that is given to the “connection with the land” that Maori use as a basis for special privilege.

      • Pete George

        I don’t see how it does that at all, unless it can be proven that a completely different people survived separately and signed a treaty first.

        The ToW is based on 1840, it doesn’t even take into account various tribal fluctuations before that.

    • Landy

      Well, it means we need a whole new billion dollar fiscal envelope* and a whole new free-by-public-subsidy TV channel*.    For the Egyptians.
       
      AND it completely destroys the strategy of some ambitious thronebums from the financial sector, to get there via historic grievance.

      I think that’ may be the big deal, Pete George.  

      (*Maybe Ma-ori could send back theirs, even if slightly used?)

      • Tracey

         Landy, how would it change the obligations arising under the Treaty of Waitangi, you’ve lost me there? Two parties entered a kind of contract which had obligations. 1% of the current population got a as much benefit as 99% of the then current population. It was a very good deal for the 1%.This agreement wasn’t made because Maori claimed to be in NZ first, but because they were 99% of the current population.

        Egyptions or phoenicians arriving 2000 years earlier changes the treaty, how??

  • Agent BallSack

    According the history I was taught the Mori Oris were here before the Maori. But I don’t see the Maori falling over themselves to gift NZ back to the Chatham Islanders.

  • Gazzaw

    Is it true that Treaty claims lawyers are already on their way to Athens & Cairo?

  • Simo

    Might put a leak in the trough?

  • Vlad

    Regrettably this has about as much credibility as a Garry Parsloe press release.  I worked on a documentary on this subject many years ago (in Australia).  The Spanish theory has the most legs.  It can be traced back to the vigorous representations of the Bishop of Rockhampton in the early 20th century and spread quite widely.  His claims of evidence of Spanish wrecks & coins indicating settlement/discoveries in NZ and Australia had their roots in the sectarian divide between Catholics and Protestants in the antipodes that probably lasted up to the 1950’s, and was his effort to establish Catholic ascendancy in history.  The Phoenician/Greek/Egyptian hieroglyph angles are nonsense and rank with ancient alien visits as tinfoil hat history.  Some of it got started by the discovery of old Middle Eastern coins, undoubtedly brought back by diggers after WW1.

    • Cadwallader

      Wasn’t there a Portugese theory too?

      • Vlad

        Yes, remember that now, probably more important than Spanish in 19th C Australian Catholic “history”.   It was fervently believed that Portugese navigator de Quiros (sp) a real explorer but religious fanatic, discovered Australia.

  • davewin

    Could help explain the condition of Greek Economics.

  • jabba

    I always wondered why the song “walk like an Egyptian” stirred my loins

  • Xlsports

    i understand this has been around for years and suggests carvings of phonecian boats and a phoenician settlement wiped out after the big explosion at taupo. old news. old outrage

  • jay cee

    this one has got to be up there with the knights templar/ freemasons guarding the “secret” of jesus christ’s decendants still living on earth.

  • Whalehunter

    Haha Maori’s. This is hilarious but it’s a bit more believable than the story of Maui fishing up the North Island isn’t it??

    • Tracey

       Or “god” creating the world in 6 days.

  • thor42

    It’d be fascinating if it were true, but yeah….. I’m skeptical, along with a number of others here.  

  • Mick

    Does this give maori an opening for a treaty claim on the pyramids of Giza?

  • Kosh103

    At any rate it will bug the Maori who live off promoting division and that is always a good thing.

  • UncleBulgaria75

    Well I guess that explains why both Maori and Egyptions use the word rā / Ra for ‘sun’.

    • Gazzaw

      What’s the Egyptian word for koha? That would really clinch the argument.

      • Landy

         Well, the word for Cairo, Qahira, pronounced more or less Koha-Ra, means
        “Respect for God of the Sun” according to the tourist pamphlet I read in Cairo…

      • UncleBulgaria75

        Do you know what’s right next to Greece?.. Albania…
        And do you know what the Albanian word ‘koha’ translates as?.. Time..
        And isn’t time really, the greatest gift you can give someone?…

        I think I’ve proven my point.  /s

    • Bunswalla

      And also why the maoris and egyptians have never been at war. Things got a little tense at one stage, but the egyptians ran home to their mummies, and the maoris ran home to their pas.

  • Peter Wilson

    Reminds me a bit of the controversy about Mallory climbing Everest first. So what, he didn’t make it back down that’s for sure.

    Similarly, it was Maori who first successfully settled here – where are the Eqyptians now?

    Maori are signatories to NZ’s founding document, te tiriti, and so maintain their status as NZs original inhabitants we owe them thanks for allowing the rest of us to settle here.

    • Michael

       They didn’t “allow” us to settle here. They agreed to it as their most desirable future option. The alternative was to be conquered by the British or the French.

      Don’t forget that the British were the other signatories – the Maori owe them thanks for providing a rule of law and cultural customs that ultimately would end the continual inter-tribal wars. Hence the agreement encapsulated in the Treaty – all would be treated equally under the law.

      • JimboBug

        Like that will ever happen.

      • Gazzaw

        You are oh so right Jimbo. As a fourth generation Kiwi I don’t feel like at all like an equal.

      • Whalehunter

        Yeah equality must have felt good…back in the day..

      • phronesis

        As you suggest, perhaps the biggest thing the treaty achieved for maori was British military protection at a time when plenty of other players would have been happy to slaughter them all and plant their own flag.

      • Peter Wilson

        Phronesis, so Maori should really be grateful to the British for all they’ve done?

      • Tracey

        What a typically patronising european interpretation.We saved them from wars by warring on them, killing them and stealing their land? God only knows why they are grateful, and she isn’t saying. One reason the British wanted a treaty was because conquering had worked very badly for them in other countries.

    • Landy

       So they were first?   Your evidence being…?

  • Salacious T Crumb

    Bwahahahaha. The Maori radicals were right all along. The Treaty IS a fraud.

  • Vikingonmars

    Outrage is building. That fraud Graham has landed us with an open ended gift card for Ngai Tahu and Tainui.
     http://asianinvasion2006.blogspot.co.nz/

  • Phar Lap

    Seems the person who has a lot to answer for is Geofrey Palmer ,ex Liebour PM who opened the can of worms.Lest we forget.Yet he thinks he walks on water,as do most of his self serving band of useless layabouts who sit in parliament.Yes some of his ilk who help make the can of worms decision with him are still there .FFS.Yes T.O.W.benefit scheme.

  • Peter Wilson

    Whether Egyptian, Chinese or from Mars, it’s Maori and the Crown who are full partners in the governance of NZ, via the treaty, and no-one else.

    • Landy

       Entirely a matter of interpretation, but one I note the Catholics are very keen on.
       
      All these majestic phrases have been laid on the treaty, or the version of the treaty that was allowed to prevail after a bit of suppression and editing and twottish interpretation, by those who wanted to milk it.
       
      Especially with it not applying to the South Island, and with only a few N Island tribal leaders having signed the Ma-ori side of it anyway, the claim that you make that it makes only one named ethnic group one of the “full partners in the governance of New Zealand” just self-serving polemics.

  • Scott

    The real outrage is that this stuff has been reported in the mainstream media. 

    Noel Hilliam, the bloke behind this book, is notorious amongst scholars of New Zealand history for his wild and often bizarre claims. In his time he’s alleged that Phoenicians, Celts, Egyptians, Greeks, and aliens from outer space have visited these islands. He’s also claimed to have discovered a Nazi U boat loaded with gold off the Northland coast, and boasted of winning a prestigious award that went to another person entirely. In short, he’s as dodgy as a three dollar bill. Here’s a bit of a primer on Hilliam’s idiocy:http://readingthemaps.blogspot.co.nz/2010/11/dargavilles-media-should-honour-towns.html
     
    I don’t know who Maxwell Hill is, but Gary Cook is another nutbar. He writes for New Age magazines like Nexus and claims to have been led to ancient archaeological sites by spirits. Cook often puts a string of initials after his name, but the ‘degrees’ he holds were purchased over the net. Like Hilliam, he has no academic training in any discipline. 

    • Landy

       Gary Cook appears to run tours of what he perceives to be the sacred side of New Zealand.   People wanting to get a look at him can see his own statements on youtube at 

      • Matt

        Reminds me of another self-appointed expert/bearded nut-job Ken Ring

      • Agent BallSack

        Kind of reminds me of a 2010’s version of Fingerprints of the Gods

  • Scott

    Some folks here seem to be excited by Hilliam’s book because they feel its widespread acceptance would lead to the abrogation of the Treaty of Waitangi and the end of Maori claims for the return of land and other resources. They should be careful what they wish for, because Hilliam’s tome appears to be built around his relationship with some very strange and very avaricious people. 
    Hilliam is a long-time associate of the Universal Peace Nation of Waitaha, a cult whose members claim to be the descendants of extra-terrestrials with psychic powers who landed in ancient Egypt and later travelled to New Zealand via South America and Easter Island. The Waitahans make a bit of money off gullible New Agers by selling glossy picture books full of gobbledygook and running tours of their supposed ancient ‘sacred sites’. 

    Last decade, when he worked as a volunteer at Dargaville’s maritime museum, Hilliam developed a relationship with Patrick Ruka, a prominent member of the Waitaha cult. After deciding that a Maori carving of a gatepost found near Dargaville was an ancient Waitaha artefact, Hilliam got Ruka to perform a gobblegook ceremony to ‘welcome’ the object into the museum. The museum eventually repudiated both Hilliam and the Universal Peace Nation of Waitaha. 

    In Hilliam’s new book, a man named George Connelly claims to be a descendant of Egyptian settlers who arrived in this country via Peru. Hilliam presents Connelly’s testimony as a sign that some New Zealanders have always maintained an awareness of their connection with Egypt, and their pre-Maori roots. 

    What Hilliam doesn’t tell his readers is that Connelly, who also uses the name Hori Kupenga Manuka Manuka, is a supporter of the Universal Peace Nation of Waitaha and a former leader of another bizarre organisation, Ko Huiarau. In the 1990s Ko Huiarau attracted hundreds of members by claiming to be the modern representative of an ancient government of these islands which had signed treaties with numerous foreign powers, including Britain. Ko Huairau insisted that when these treaties were recognised it would take control of the whole of New Zealand, and promised to share the wealth of the country with those who joined its ranks. Ko Huirau has fragmented over the last decade, and now has no clear leadership, but George Connelly continues to promote its ideas. Connelly claims, in fact, to be a direct descendant of the leaders of the ancient Ko Huiarau nation, and thus the rightful ‘King’ of modern New Zealand. 

    In a cover article back in 2007, The Truth reported that Connelly, who lives in Huntly, was planning to go the Waitangi Tribunal to claim the Waikato from the Tainui iwi, on the grounds that his ancestors had lived in the region long before Tainui. 

    A quick google suggests that Maxwell Hill, one of the co-authors of To the End of the Earth, lives down the road from Connelly in Taupiri, and has a history of supporting the absurd claims of ‘King Manuka Manuka’. In 2010, for instance, Hill sent a letter to Waikato’s regional council and New Zealand’s parliament in which he insisted that Connelly deserved to have control of the fishing licenses given to various Maori iwi as part of Treaty settlements:
     http://www.parliament.nz/NR/rdonlyres/B23324D8-6261-46C3-BAA2-37363D4897BF/167848/49SCMA_EVI_00DBHOH_BILL10309_1_A148834_MaxHill_.pdf

    There is a certain irony, then, in the way that many right-wingers are publicising Hilliam and Hill’s book, and hoping that it might somehow derail what they consider the Treaty ‘gravy train’. If the people behind The End of the Earth ever got their way, then the whole of New Zealand would be
    delivered up to the members of a couple of small demented sects.  

    • Landy

      Scott says “.. New Zealand would be delivered up to … a couple of small demented sects.”  

      That sounds just like what we have got now. 

      Example:

      There’s a bunch of grown-up men who often wear funny hats and satin robes who take out their artificial suppressed lives* on small children by assaulting them sexually.  

      Then they also terrify the kids out of their wits by saying they are protected by God, and often threaten great harm to family members if they tell anybody. 

      They lie about it under church protection.  They never get investigated by police, who are very pro-catholic.   In many ways they still bleed state coffers for vast, huge sums out of our taxes.  

      The sects these people shelter under are also expert at thieving.

      Churchy words are (periodically) used to express REMORSE!  REGRET!  SHAME!  and great protestations of change are offered.   But you notice nothing ever changes.

      The offenders add to the victims’ trauma and problems with self-regard and self-respect by encouraging the community to call them terms like “liars”, “wicked” “shockingly behaved” “unstable” and “bad family”.

      That’s pretty demented, by any standards.   To me, one demented sect based on idiotic stories is a lot like another.

      Wake up, Scott.

      *  Reason for the artificial suppressed lives of the wider group of men in this particular sect:  money.   If they were allowed to marry, they would have to be paid a salary.   In the USA alone, where there are 50,000 of them, that would cost at the very minimum $1.5 billion USD per year.

  • Tigger NZ

    It’s probably all bollocks. But there needs to be a proper archeological examination of the pre-European stone structures in the Waipoua forest, not politically blocked by iwi and DOC as at present ..

  • Scott

    Tigger: you’ve fallen for one of Hilliam’s canards. The Waipoua forest has been thoroughly studied, and you can read the several archaeological reports which have resulted from these studies in any university library. You can also visit the forest and wander about at will. Hilliam and the other conspiracy theorists have seized on the fact that a few pieces of data collected by researchers into Waipoua were embargoed, and argued that some sort of veil of secrecy has been thrown over the site. But it is very common for some of the information collected by researchers to be embargoed, at the request of the folks who provided the info. I’d wager that there’s an embargo on some or all of every third or fourth text in the Turnbull library. Oral histories, too, often come with all sorts of provisos. In all likelihood the information from Waipoua which was embargoed consisted of some stories which local people told, but didn’t want available to the public. Hilliam et al have blown that fact that a small amount of information was embargoed, at the request of the informants, into myths about reports being suppressed and parts of the forest being off limits. It’s absurd stuff. 

  • Taxpayer

    Oh well the bro’s will have to give it all back so we can give it to the correct people.  The bro’s will have to get a job now:)

  • Mooloo

    I live a 15 minute walk from the carved rocks in Raglan. They certainly are not Polynesian and predate the polynesian migration . It’s very hard to get any explanation from historians or academics based in Raglan or the Waikato . My thoughts were they may be Spanish or Portuguese. But this is new to me very interesting. it makes no difference to me one way or the other I’m just interested in our local History.  

  • Scott

    ”They certainly are not Polynesian’

    They certainly are. Take a look at the archaic rock paintings in the Auckland War Memorial Museum’s Maori Court, as well as the Rekohu dendroglyphs and Rapa Nui petroglyphs reproduced in Rhys Richards’ book Manu Moriori. The Raglan petroglyphs are in a very common archaic Polynesian style. They do look different to the classical Maori style that developed gradually here, and that is shown off in most meeting house carvings, but there’s more than one period and mode of Polynesian art. 

    Even if the Raglan artefacts were Iberian, they couldn’t have been pre-Polynesian – the Iberians only got to the Azores and Canaries and Cape Verde Islands towards the middle of the second millenium AD!

    • James

      The petroglyphs on Rapa Nui are to this day undeciphered. Polynesians did not have a written language. Perhaps they are from Mauis time, his signature which appears in several NZ locations, is one of the characters.

  • Tracey

    Two words – contra proferentum

  • Barnaby111

    We’ve always known that this blog is soft in the head, Cameron but supporting the bizarre theories of Maxwell C Hill et al? If this is what passes for evidence and debate on this site then we now know for sure that there is little of any substance here.

  • TaipaLad

    Seems a bit crazy all this talk, I am a true Kiwi born and bred.
    I don’t care if I have European blood or Maori blood, just that i am a New Zealander.
    More oppurtunity was given to me if I had Maori blood at School yet all my peers who had at least a 16th have done nothing.
    Get over the claims and get on with life as no 100% true Maori exists.
    We talk about Culture, We make the culture to suit what we want, along with our customary rights.
    Why should I be allowed more Kina, Paua, or any other Kai Moana than my Pakeha Brother??
    Wake up people!

  • KT

    If you say the petroglyphs are Maori, you are saying the Maori had a written language, which they did not.

  • Kerry2344

    Just because some of the people researching the subject are radicals does not mean you can rule out the credibility of the evidence. Ancient egyptians mummies have been found with red and blonde hair, thus proving those genetics existed within the race. Maui and his people spread throughout the pacific and settled there first. Why do you think the samoans say the creator of their island was tangaloa, who had blonde hair. When the europeans came, the samoans called them the children of tangaloa, whereas on other islands they assumed them to be atua or spiritual beings who were sent by gods. Ring any bells with the patupaiarehe legends, who are stated to be iwi atua. 

59%