The Case For Prehistoric Civilisations In New Zealand


Prehistoric Civilisations in New Zealand

For many years a small but dedicated group of archaeologists and researchers

have been exploring one of New Zealand’s most taboo subjects

– the question of whether or not settlements existed in New Zealand

prior to the arrival of the “first canoes” of the Maori.

While thanks in part to their work,

the fact that New Zealand was populated prior to the arrival of Maori settlers has now been well established

(despite the reluctance of some people to acknowledge it),

the discovery in 1874 of an ancient carved tree stump

is potentially the most important archeological “anomaly”ever found in this country.

The reason? It could be 150,000 years old.

THERE is a problem with official NZ history.

While orthodox NZ historians continue to insist that NZ was uninhabited prior to the arrival of the Maori, at the same time they acknowledge the fact that virtually every other important island in the South Pacific bears lasting evidence of deeply ancient “megalithic”(carved huge standing stone) civilisations.

From the famous “Ring Road” of Rarotonga to the gorgeous megalithic artefacts on Tonga and the standing statues of Easter Island – all bear witness to an advanced civilisation that roamed the Pacific, established settlements and left behind not only clues, but monuments.

Orthodox historians still contend, however, that somehow New Zealand missed out on these ancient explorations and settlements and was ignored by these peoples in their wanderings around the Pacific – even though megalith evidence has been found here as well, and verified by some of NZ’s most distinguished scholars of the 19th century. J Macmillan Brown in his seminal work Maori and Polynesian remarked on the discovery of not one but two “Stonehenge” type arrays here, in Ateamuri (near Lake Taupo) and the Bay of Islands.After a brief moment or two of national debate, 19th Century New Zealanders got on with other things, and these discoveries were subsequently ignored.

Orthodox NZ historians, like so many others in so many other disciplines, have a huge investment in “established” knowledge, and it is very difficult for actual facts to overturn a deeply held mindset. Indeed, one would seriously wonder how ancient peoples managed to miss a couple of islands as big as ours, while at the same time locating and populating and extensively traveling among many islands infinitely smaller than NZ all over the Pacific.
But let us remember, after all, a long history of academics selecting only “facts” and material that fit their preconceived perceptions while ignoring and/or discarding those which do not fit with the prevailing paradigm of their time.

There is an alternative history of NZ to the official one, and it often shows up in material evidence discarded by those who cannot come to accept the validity of that material evidence when it is at variance with their own prior beliefs.

There are many other clues to this alternative history of ancient New Zealand and regardless of how they are ignored, they continue to murmur away quietly in the corner of our awareness. Some are found in the myths, legends and carvings of the Waitaha, in which we see the history of a nation composed of 200 Iwi who arrived in NZ in the 2nd century AD.Note that this settlement precedes that of the Polynesian Maori Iwi by 1000 years – this warrior race from the Polynesian islands having arrived during the years 1250 to 1350 AD.

But most intriguingly, the story of the Waitaha Nation also contains reference to other people living in New Zealand before their arrival.

Were these “Waitaha” legends the only references to pre-Maori NZ settlements, we could probably safely ignore them. However, when coupled with hundreds of other tantalising examples along the same lines, we begin to suspect a deliberate “cleansing” and shaping of history to satisfy a specific agenda.

More Evidence Still

For the serious and honest researcher into pre-Maori settlement of New Zealand, there is another tantalising piece of evidence in the little-known canal systems of the North and South Islands.

I have made measurements from aerial photographs of a site near the Awanui River in Northland and estimate that there are more than 200 km of interconnected canals or waterways. Measuring 2 metres across and up to 1.5 metres deep, it is estimated that more than 25 million baskets of spoil, weighing out an average of 40 kilos each, had been moved.

This would be on a scale comparable to the massive similar excavations accomplished by the ancient Mayan civilisation in the Yucatan.

While we are completely unsure how ancient this canal system is, or who made it, orthodox NZ archaeologists and historians are beginning to acknowledge that there may be something yet to the pre-Maori “theory”.

• Pollen dating, used effectively as a dating method overseas, is now used in New Zealand, and according to an article in the New Zealand Herald 26th June 1999:

“…Recent analysis of pollen samples and ash found in peat cores taken from Motutapu Island, backed by radiocarbon dating, suggests that deforestation (attributable to the felling and clearing by man) occurred there at least as early as 1200 BP. (BP represents before present at a date set as the year 1950).

This means that perhaps the first millennium dawn chorus (of birds) did have a human audience…The implications, if these findings are substantiated, are profound and the reverberations in the archaeological ampitheatre are likely to be similar to those caused by the discovery in the South Island of bones of the native kiore (rat) dating to about 2000 BP.”

From the Wellington Dominion 24th July 1999: “Pollen ‘shows early Maori arrival’.” “Evidence from fossilised pollen suggested Maori could have arrived in New Zealand before the time of Christ – up to 2500 years ago – a Massey University expert said yesterday.

“Massey geographer John Flenley, an expert in palynology – the use of fossil pollen to detect human impact – said there was pollen evidence that would be at odds with latest findings. (Reference to the recent dating of Moa bone fragments by Highman to 700 years.) Vegetation changes in New Zealand, possible indications of early human presence, could place settlements in New Zealand as far back as 2500 years.”

The headline in the Dominion 23rd July 1999, read: “Humans ‘could have come and gone’ 2000 years ago.”

“The controversial belief that the first people landed in New Zealand about 2000 years ago has been upheld by new evidence in a paper by Christchurch fossil researcher Richard Holdaway.

“Dr Holdaway says that the presence of a population of kiore (native rat) implies a visit – of whatever duration – by humans and he stands by his radiocarbon dating conclusion that rat populations were established in the North and South Islands “contemporaneously” at between AD50 and AD150.”

New Zealand Listener 13th April 1951. “New Zealand Cave drawings in Danger. – An article on the study of South Island rock drawings by Dutch artist, Theo Schoon, and the deterioration of sites.”

“…The photographs that he (Schoon) sent me …. show me that the paintings date for the most part from before the arrival of the Maoris – the work perhaps of a Moa hunting people who were completely exterminated by the anthropophagous Maori shortly before the year 1000 of our era.”

An article, “Legends Tell of Tribes who Came Before the Fleet”, appeared in the Auckland Star, 27th September 1957:

“As every schoolboy is supposed to know, Kupe discovered New Zealand about AD 950, and found it unoccupied.

“Researchers of the caliber of the late Sir
Peter Buck throw doubts on this story that Kupe found New Zealand unoccupied. They have unfolded legends, which assert that Kupe did, in fact, see many signs of habitation.

“Certainly by the time the Toi expedition arrived a century or two later (c1150 AD) there was no lack of inhabitants in New Zealand. They were so numerous, say the legends, that the followers of Toi spoke of them as ‘ants’.

“The ‘human ants’ whom Toi discovered were given the name of Tangata Whenua, the ‘first comers’. Where they came from, we can only guess. They settled on many points of the North Island, and their numbers were such that they pre-fixed the word “tini”, meaning “myriad”, to their family name. The people of Tini-e-Maruiwi were the “human ants” whom Toi found on the Tamaki Isthmus (Auckland).

“When the Great Fleet arrived two centuries later, there was great surprise at the extent of the Tangata Whenua population at Tamaki: they were even more surprised at the pattern of their defences on the volcanic hills that dotted the isthmus. It was something entirely different from the Maori of the Fleet. They had never seen anything quite like this in their homeland islands.”

The paradigm changes

Although the earliest dates of human habitation in NZ (as well as various other places around the Pacific) are being slowly pushed back as the evidence continues to emerge, there is much more evidence still that remains in museum basements and storage facilities, and will never see the light of a display cabinet. This is because much of it is of a nature that cannot be explained, and therefore remains hidden from view. However, while we are aware of many such artefacts, there is nothing thus far discovered as utterly intriguing as the 1874 discovery of a carved tree stump together with its carving implement – the age of which defies not only the accepted paradigm but almost the imagination itself.

The actual tree stump itself was discovered near Albert Park in Auckland, while the workmen were excavating for the library at the University. It was found under 25 feet (8+ metres) of sediment, together with a stone implement which was presumably used to carve it. The discovery was duly noted in both scholarly and popular journals of the time. It was unremarkable save for the fact that lying undisturbed under 8 metres of sediment meant that it would have to be very, very old. Perhaps, as some experts have noted, more than 150,000 years old.

Unfortunately, this discovery was not considered important enough to merit its preservation and got “lost”. Neither the implement nor the stump was ever mentioned again in the literature.

The Hard Evidence

The original scholarly paper on the discovery was titled “Notes upon the probable Changes that have taken place in the Physical Geography of New Zealand since the arrival of the Maori” by T.H. Cockburn-Hood, F.G.S. (p112-120). In it the author “explains some scientific evidence in the form of an ancient stump that proves ancient inhabitants existed in NZ in a period prior to volcanic land formation. It is evidence of human activity in NZ prior to the laying down of ancient volcanic debris.”

The Auckland Southern Cross newspaper ran a “Report on the chopped tree stump” and it apparently created quite a stir at the time. This is their report:

“Report on the chopped tree stump”

“An exceedingly interesting relic of the very remote past is now to be seen in the office of the Improvement Commissioners. It is the root of a tree found in one of the cuttings being made under the direction of that Commission.

The root has evidently been chopped through by a stone adze, which was found beside it. There were also several small branches and roots of the same tree on which the edge of the stone adze had been tried, and the whole crown of the stump had the marks of having been laboriously and patiently cut through by the rude stone implement in the unknown past, and by one of an equally unknown race of human beings.

The root was found when cutting the sewer up the middle of Coburg Street, near the lower end, a little above its junction with the continuation of Wellesley Street, and at a depth of about 25 feet below the surface of the Barrack Hill at that place. From the surface downwards for about 14 feet, at the place where the root was found, the hill is composed of volcanic matter. Below that depth, for about 8 or 9 feet, there is a series of layers of a mixture of sand and clay, which appears to have been at one time deposited under water. Below that is a large bed of fine blue ‘washdirt’ resembling blue clay.

These strata and the blue clay do not seem to have been disturbed by volcanic action, and the several strata are lying with the utmost regularity possible. It was in the upper portion of the bed of blue clay that the root was found embedded, standing upright as if it had grown there, and the several small branches which were found at the same place were of the same kind of timber, and bore plain and distinct marks of the stone implement upon them.

The inference to be drawn is not only that the islands of New Zealand had been inhabited long anterior to (before) the migration of the Maoris to them but that they had been peopled before the extinct volcano in the neighbourhood of the present Mechanic’s Institute had begun to belch its mud torrents and streams of melted lava.

This conclusion seems to be inevitable, whether it be assumed that the tree grew where the root and the implement of its destruction were, or whether, as some incline to think, a river had run where the blue stratum is found, and that the root had been carried from a distance to its resting place. In either case the root must have been where it was found the other day, not only before the volcanic matter was deposited on the Barrack Hill, but for a sufficiently long period before that to permit a stratum of 8 to 10 feet in thickness to be deposited.”
(my emphasis – ed.)


45 thoughts on “The Case For Prehistoric Civilisations In New Zealand

  1. I first heard of this ‘theory’ a few months ago. At first I thought ‘why would anyone want to believe it or find it possible to believe…ok there is a desire for most of us to believe in something like magic, gods etc because hope and wonder are more interesting and pleasurable than reality that for many is boring and even painful.
    However even having the basic understanding of science (which is not a dirty word) does put reality and excitement together and can eliminate the need for magic.
    First of all “Science is not an opinion” – I quote this from an anti-Trump protester in Washington. To the point and perfect. Science doesn’t deal with opinions. It evaluates evidence to develop plausible theories and then tries to prove them wrong. If no evaluated evidence disputes a given theory then that theory gets closer and closer to being seen as a fact.
    Evolution is an interesting theory here. A huge amount of data and evidence supports it and as yet nothing, over the last 150 years, that has been subjected to rigorous evaluation has caused any doubt about it.
    I don’t believe any ‘researcher’ who subscribes to the idea that people inhabited New Zealand before the Polynesians (Maori ancestors) have ever approached their conclusions in this way. That is why the universities and trained archaeologists do not take them seriously. Why would they? If you were a brain surgeon would you listen to a barber’s theories about removing a tumour? Would you vote for someone wanting to be prime-minister who had no political experience? Well some do obviously – hence Trump…enough said.
    Simply there is much evidence supporting (including genetics now) the theory that Polynesians were first in New Zealand (remember science doesn’t accept any theory as 100% fact although there are plenty like ‘Evolution’ are up to about 99.999999%) and absolutely no rigorously scrutinised evidence to the contrary.
    But don’t take my word for it…just read it from the relevant journals who only publish what is taken seriously by those who are qualified. They are not ignoring any evidence that is properly researched and open for discussion among peers.
    Or is it something you just want to believe…more like a religion?

    Parting shot!

    Not long ago I came across a theory that all over the world there existed mega – fauna (extra large animals) until humans arrived in their territories. The humans, in order to survive in a new environment found them the easiest targets and quickly drove them to extinction (mammoths, giant kangaroos etc) everywhere except Africa where humans evolved (which helps prove where we came from because the environment was already familiar to us)
    We know that moa only became extinct a few hundred years ago which roughly coincides with the arrival of Maori ancestors from Polynesia. The theory suggests that if anyone were here well before them then the moa would’ve already been wiped out.

  2. Before Maori NZ’s First Inhabitants Reviews:
    Shelley Hedges: Thanks Ross, I might add also to all my friends that I have read Ross’s book and found it to be a well-researched easy to read book which was thoroughly enjoyable and informative and I would highly recommend it. You can get it on Kindle at Amazon for about $8.00. Definitely worth a read.
    Chris Sargent I agree Shelley it was a fantastic read and well researched.
    Like · Reply · 20 September at 10:40

    Darleen Bennett: I enjoyed reading your book Ross and have referred back to it on several occasions. Good job!
    Maureen Willoughby: This boggles my mind as to why in New Zealand we don’t won’t the truth about our history and what the people where really like, why the big cover up by whom and why?
    Hi Ross,
    The info you sent me is very interesting and I haven’t read it all yet. Have you sent a copy to Allen yet? I will send him this email also.
    If you recall when you visited us I told you about a Russian sailing ship that visited Nelson in 1820 and were greeted by Maori in their canoes. They were unusual as they didn’t have palisades around their settlements, wore woven flax garments (men in short skirts & women in frocks (European style), they welcomed the sailors to trade with them and weren’t aggressive, seeking friendship. They (the natives) were wiped out by Northern Maori for kai (food) a few years after the ship left.
    During their stay the sailors traded with them and had acquired a great deal of carvings, trinkets, etc., which is now stored in museum in St Petersburg. Today’s Maori want the articles returned to New Zealand but the Russian government refused saying that the original owners were wiped out by Maori therefore the rightful owners no longer exist.
    I tried to photocopy and send you the article from the NZ Geographic magazine but it wouldn’t go as it has Copy Right attached to it. But if you type into your search engine the story on your computer, only the introduction will show with an excellent painting done by one of the crew.
    I believe that the people were not Maori and could be of one mentioned in your book ‘Before Maori NZ’s First Inhabitants’ as found online

    Allen J Little QSM,JP.
    Dear readers, I have just read a small yet stimulating book by Ross M Bodle, titled “Before Maori NZs First Inhabitants“ ISBN 9781475080117 . (Cover attached) I tend to be somewhat sceptical around ill considered theories. The Author to my way of thinking carefully and sensitively deals with a complex topic and supports his argument with a good evidence line. I do not believe he could be construed as being of the lunatic fringe, pushing racism for antisocial reasons. Bodle writes with conviction and openness in a style which must leave readers in no doubt as to what he is talking about.
    “Before Maori NZs First Inhabitants“, surely must be regarded as an evidential corner stone in the building momentum calling for a ‘Commission Of Inquiry’ into New Zealand History and its Teaching. There are four principle questions which must addressed openly and honestly:-

    (1) Has there at any stage been orchestrate collusion between Maori and other interests such as Government Officers or Agencies to withhold historic information from public or academic scrutiny?

    (2) What information, artefacts or related data have been gathered, where, when and why?

    (3) Can we have confidence regarding the compilation and presentation of Ancient New Zealand history and how it is communicated within the Educational system, particularly how it is taught in our Schools?
    (4) Can we be assured that historic sites in New Zealand are Registered well cared for with integrity, free from destruction or damage of any kind.
    Hope you can manage to think about this,
    Best regards,
    Allen J Little QSM,JP

    Phil Whitley: My endorsement won’t carry much weight for anyone who doesn’t know me and my appreciation of research and clarity of writing. After enjoying ’Before Maori’ it then became one of my ‘go-to’ reference books. Well done, Ross Bodle!

    From the files / reviews of ‘E Local Magazine’, in Pukekoehe…
    ‘Before Maori; New Zealand’s First Inhabitants’
    By Ross Bodle
    ISBN; 9781475080117
    Available as a paperback from Amazon Books also as an e-book available in different languages at
    This is a great book for anyone who is aware that something is not right with the presented version of this country’s history with regards to its ancient past. Ross Bodle is of Ngati Porou descent and grew up on the East Coast of the North Island, as a child he sat at the feet of his beloved Nanny from Tokomaru Bay and learned of the ways of healing, knowledge that had been orally handed down through his iwi over time. Here Ross collects a number of stunning revelations as to the pre-maori history either of an oral nature as reported by chiefs or of a physical nature that attest to the presence anciently of four different races or groups who lived in these islands over a span of thousands of years before the arrival of the Maori. Rating; ****

    Dear Ross, I am 74; I’ve lived on Waiheke Island for the last 20 years although my ancestors were present on the island since 1850. I was self-employed for forty odd years as a house lifter In West Auckland and to this day my Ngai Porou boys carry on the business. Obviously my first wife was Ngai Porou and my present wife Raewyn is Ngapuhi. I have won ”Spot the White” (fella) all my life due to my continual and extended immersion with Islanders and Maori for whom I have great understanding. I am extremely aware of the Maori poverty trap but have the view that there is a contributing lack of responsibility on both sides. Musket wars are very interesting where Hone Heke, I have read, killed more Maoris that were killed in the entire Maori Wars and furthermore on 90% of these encounters and skirmishes there were no Europeans were present.’ What a plot.’ The savage uneducated people who lived under constant siege had arms power and turned on their own people, leaving vacant, unoccupied land which was just up for grabs by the English. I could waffle and preamble all over the place which I suspect I am doing because your investigation involves history, economics, anthropology, sociology the whole range of perspectives that exist. Seven canoes, Kupe and navigational abilities I consider myth – motivated by historians that liked dates and matching social phenomena. I notice you used the terms Pakeha-Maori not part Maori. I think your sequence is more accurate. Anyhow about your book I have enjoyed my encounter with the topic you have presented and admire your efforts – I believe that the world would be a better place if others had done what you have done. May the force be with you. Cheers John.

    Who Settled the Pacific First?
    Traditions run very deep, very deep within the cultures of the Pacific People? All tell of their personal heritage as coming from some island and the only way to get a rough idea of time frame is to have a DNA taken. This alone came up with some very interesting information so why DNA? The study of stones and bones often seem the objective, the study of DNA looks more like hard science; after all, one can convict criminals on the basis of DNA so why can’t we trace the first settlers?

    Construction of a traditional Vaka:
    To give one a brief idea of building a large voyaging Vaka / double canoe by the natives of the Pacific was by no means an easy task as they could only use the natural resources available, i.e. The two hulls were hollowed out from massive tree trunks, seating and beams were fastened together with cordage, sails made from broad leaf type matting material (pandanus) woven together by the woman folk and cordage spun from coconut fibre. Holes were drilled using either a sharp bone, coral or shark teeth, once completed each timber/lumber members were tied together using twine from coconut husks and the use of sap from the bread fruit tree as sealant. The whole project of building a double hulled Vaka took approximately 12 months as a community undertaking and when commissioned the whole village celebrated.

    The Hawaii to Tahiti Voyage:
    In 1975-76 the Hokule’a double canoe sailed from the Hawaiian Islands to Tahiti with a crew of fifteen Polynesians and one Micronesian navigator. They carried no instruments and navigated by star positions and wave patterns over 5.000km taking thirty five days; (142.85 km per 24 hour day).
    To make a true traditional voyage they took with them the foods and livestock of that era, all survived except for the taro, as told by the media this voyage was a tremendous success, or was it?
    The Hokule’a also carried a medical doctor our late Dr. David Lewis a New Zealander who mentioned after three days at sea the Hokule’a crew wanted to abort the whole voyage simply because they didn’t want any more traditional kai (food) unless fresh provisions could be obtained. For some extraordinary reason a freighter just happened to be close at hand and contact was made thereby supplying the crew with fresh modern foods. When this transfer was accomplished the Hokule’a continued her voyage to Tahiti. Surprisingly, no mention of this action was told by the media, why?
    Dr. David Lewis indicated it was an honour to be selected from a medical point of view as he wanted to write a paper of the wellness of the crew especially when consuming old traditional foods, this setback for Dr. David Lewis called it a sham, a complete ‘Balls Up’ why? According to David having electronics aboard meant this wasn’t really a traditional voyage more likely as being a complete waste of his valuable time. End Quote.

    Kupe the legendary explorer:
    Whenever the writer asked local iwi as to Kupe’s original landing place in Aotearoa / New Zealand their answers indicated ‘Kupe landed right here on this very shore. It seems the older generation of Maori when relocating took their belief with them thereby conveying to their offspring the tale of Kupe and his landing as being their present shores. Nevertheless, factual evidence tells that this legendry explorer has the same characteristic as in the Mythology of the North Western Coastal Haida Indians of British Columbia, Canada as their Kupe was also a principle ancestral ‘Hero’ who in the dim past departed from their archipelago into the Pacific. If this holds true suggests perhaps our Kupe was in fact a North American Haida Indian and not of Polynesian decent as we have been led to

  3. I’d like to show someone interested some cave like structures near where I grew up 15 kms south of Turangi I do believe from what I can recall from many years ago that there’s no way they could’ve been naturally formed and given the size find it hard to wonder how they formed at all. Anyone know who I can contact to pass this information to in regards to this matter ?

    1. Hi Shane,
      Sounds interesting. Anyone in the Turangi region interested?
      Do you have any pics Shane? I can post them here if so, I’m sure other viewers would be interested.

  4. The Portuguese were great sailors with superior small ships with better windward ability. Caught off the Northland West coast however in an on shore gale I’m sure wrecks happened long before Tasman. Maori legend from the Nelson district tells of a tall thin people with straight noses who were defeated. Perhaps the Chinese sailed our seas long ago. I’m of the opinion that the Maori ancestors have been here very much longer than thought. Kupe landed at Pakanae Hokianga and could converse with the people established there. Waitaha I believe are decended from some of the first Polynesians to arrive here. There are remains where scoria was used by Maori in whare construction. When Pakeha arrived Maori were in charge of all the real estate.

  5. Rev.Dr.Chunillal Pema

    February 14, 2014 at 2:36 am
    At last some common sense. For much too long our governments have hidden, lost, purposely destroyed, lied about, kept the peace to hold onto majority votes and ignored clear evidence of pre Maori civilizations in NZ. We have been betrayed by our educators, lied to by our leaders, mocked by our neighbour nations and silenced from speaking out publicly concerning these issues. As Kiwis, we are tired of living a lie. It is time to find out the truth of NZ’s past and at least allow our future generations to face the world with a clear knowledge of their own roots and








    Comment Share

  6. Just stumbled across this interesting discussion when searching for something else, and it seems that the issue needs dividing into two questions.
    1) Is there evidence of an established population ante-dating the Maori (and this means proof of an established population, not something that is likely to be just marooned, lost sea travellers)
    2) Once 1) is proven, find out who they were, by comparing the evidence to what may have been both contempary to them and probable – for instance, even if there may be artifacts (or even art) that is similar in style to Celtic work, it is still more likely that the similarity is coincidence, and the population were either non-Maori Polynesian, or island hoppers coming from the north, perhaps even as far afield as China. The idea that “fair skinned” in oral history = European is probably a red herring, as we would not know the terms of rereference by which the fair skin was being compared to a norm.

  7. How do Maori explain the underwater water cave on the Three Kings that have bones and prehistoric fire / cooking areas where a pre-Maori people once lived during the last Ice Age some 10,000 years ago.

    1. David, wondering if you have a link to any info. on the underwater caves at Three Knights? Had a quick look but specific info seems somewhat sparse, just a few brief mentions.

      1. Hi Martin, no not sure I was shown some items (bones, appeared to be human arm & some large shells) when a game boat return a few years ago to Opua from a trip up there. I understand that a university may have been taken back there. Regards

        1. Thanks David. Very little info out there except mainstream works on the subject which do not mention “pre Maori”, instead referring to “Maori in prehistory”.

          If we’re finding stuff in underwater caves that’s getting into Ice Age territory quite possibly. Author researcher Graham Hancock did an amazing book on underwater archaeology and theoretical Ice Age civilisations a few years ago.
          With regards the site in question, the chances are if a university visited there, all evidence that doesn’t fit the current paradigm will have been neatly swept under the carpet.

  8. Or… you could shed all the conspiracy theorist mumbo-jumbo about how “the establishment” are against “the truth” (i.e. YOUR truth) and look at the whole thing in a realistic light: humans are the same everywhere. We don’t like change or instability, like the shattering of the truths we thought we knew. We resist any challenge to that and for obvious good reason – new, ground-breaking theories of the past need to go through a rigorous testing and proving process and will necessarily (in spite of all your whining) take a period of time, not just be accepted wholesale because a few conspiracy blogs spout a bunch of “facts” and insist they’re the truth.

    Let’s say your theory holds water (and I believe it does) – just stick to finding out more facts to back it up, not complaining about how the ‘evil empire’ is trying to ‘cover it up’. There’s no evil empire, chums. Just people, who can’t go chasing after every crackpot theory that crops up out of the blue. Where are they going to find the funding to prove or disprove your theory? It’s hard enough finding funding to research the broadly accepted history, let alone some way out of leftfield theory.

    I applaud the search for “the truth” and the fact that you reveal ‘new knowledge’ you believe you’ve discovered – just leave all the “bad guys are stifling the truth!” rubbish out. Be real.

  9. This article is an enormous load of unsubstantiated drivel. And actually, racist rubbish. And so are most of the comments.
    Even if it were true – which it so blindingly isn’t – so what? The only people here on these islands when the white people arrived were Maori. They were in full possession of this country at the time. There were no magical Europeans, no mysterious Builders.
    It really sounds like a bunch of white people trying to discredit the Maori as being valid ancestral people in this land, and by some kind of ridiculously sloppy thinking, somehow invalidate the Treat of Waitangi.
    And while some on you may be indulging in simple or racist wishful thinking – the one who posted as Noel Hilliam – supposedly an archeologist – is an outright liar.

    1. James Passmore

      Could you please for my Legal Firm supply your correct email and contact residential address

      Noel Hilliam

    2. Ouch James! You certainly got Hilliam’s attention.
      Actually I do understand your concerns to a degree, as any “Pre Maori” settlement evidence has the potential for some serious repercussions. I’m sure the Egyptians and South Americans feel the same about the Alternative Archaeologists claiming the pyramids etc. where built by aliens, Atlanteans or whatever, and it’s certainly possible for these claims to act as a Trojan Horse for subversive agendas.
      However, in the interest of truth and scientific-historical accuracy, we do need to remain calm, logical and objective.
      The general concept of pre Maori settlement of New Zealand is neither simple nor racist. We do need to ask; Is this possible, is it plausible? If the answer is “yes”, then we need to ask, “What evidence is there”? Evidence is generally not found unless we look for it.
      That’s my 2 cent’s worth…..

    3. If Maori history say there were people here when they came here, and they do it is a historical evidence that should not be. It has nothing to do with the treaty it has to to with finding the truth of all humanity’s lost pasts if you want to look at it in a prejudicial fashion you are basically saying the Maori’s own historical evidence is anti Maori racism. You really need to stop and realism that some people long to put the puzzle pieces together and the time frames are so vast, you need to stop looking 2000 years as human migratory history and think about how we have be Homo Sapiens for 200000 years and it has only taken 10000 years for us to get to were we are after the cataclysm that erased everything. So that is 190000 years that we have evidence of vary advanced civilizations that we still can not duplicate the engineering. Gone. These cultures were world wide and your trying to portray that in 200000 years these civilizations never came and inhabited New Zealand.Stop and took at the big picture.

      1. Well written contribution James. Absolutely agree about the time frames we need to factor in to the big picture.
        A man after my own heart.
        And yes we need to concentrate on facts rather than agendas.
        Thanks James.

  10. Kia Ora,I come from the East Coast,north island,Aotearoa,my one of my many ancestors here was Pokai and Pokai breathed the air 2000 years ago,Maori oral tradition does say that There were other people here,My tribe is Ngati porou,many of the hapu that make up Ngati porou,can go back to the beginning of Aotearoa,when it was pulled out of the ocean by the Demi god Maui.So that is how long Aotearoa has been peopled,to you pakeha folk who love to rubbish all things Maori,you guys will say cods wallop to what I am saying,there is no proof in the geologic record,well the truth is we are not likely to let you guys start digging up our ancient ancestors,just to prove a point,but getting back to the geologic record,As you pakehas so love to state.An event happened on the Earth of 12000 years ago,and I can see it everywhere ig travel on the entire Eastern side of Aotearoa,let me explain abit,the last sinking of what all Polynesians call Hawaiki took place,Hawaiki wrongly named by Europeans as lemurian,wrongly named because there are no Lemurs (Lemur the animal which caused the naming of the continent) in the area of Polynesia,all Polynesians have there own name for Hawaiiki,but it’s easy to recognize,just a slight change in vowels etc. well Hawaiiki was known as the land of mud and clay,Every single country on the pacific rim has water born mud and clay that makes up its surface layer,Volcanic eruptions have happened everywhere that made there own layers but not so extensive as the mud and clay,well back to Aotearoa,water born mud and clay make up the now main surface layer of Aotearoa,So if youse find the surface from before 12000 years back,youse will find people lived at those layers also,Hence why youse found a carved tree stump under 8 meters of water born clay,Noel Hillam that is propaganda what you are talking,some of the wake that bought the tattooed man here are buried here

    1. Language is how you date a race folks,us Polynesians didn’t come from Israel or Greece and the phoenicians didn’t bring us here either this is and always was the Polynesians world,the Phoenicians came here of there own accord,but through linguistics our Maori language is from time immemorial,where your guys English language is only very recent,the oldest races in Aotearoa spoke the same language as the Maori,the South Americans all of them( not including the conquistadors) came from Polynesia,not as you Pakeha say the Polynesians came from south America,you pakeha should ask the south Americans and the Maori where they came from,not try and tell us we came here with the Chinese etc,Doesn’t it puzzle you Pakeha how south America before the Spanish is still full of Maori names and they look just like the Maori,if you pakeha ask there orators they will tell you that they came from a sunken pacific continent which the Polynesians call Hawaiiki,same as the Maori,it’s the same with the Indians all the way up into Canada,and no propaganda you Pakeha can say will change anything…little lost history of Hawaiiki to you Pakeha,which was always in Maori oral tradition,there were 3 main races in Hawaiiki,what became known as the Celts in the north,what became known as the orientals in the west and what is now known as Polynesians in the south part of the continent which is still Polynesia…fact the celts don’t originate from Europe,there graves have been found all the way from the pacific coast of Asia to Europe,another fact,the Chinese and the Indians from India are not the original owners of what is now China and India,the oldest graves dug up so far in china have what is now classed as Celts in them,another fact in the pacific area waqqa blondes have been around from time immemorial,so what are now known as the celts have in a roundabout way come home again,but us Maori we never left,another fact there was a worldwide super global civilization in existence that came from Hawaiiki not Greece or Egypt and definitely not from Ireland or Wales,but from Hawaiiki.

      1. Hello Len Atkins, Obviously some readers collect their knowledge by reading previous writings some of which are hearsay, not factual. i.e. tree stump carvings being at least 150,000 years old, lets get one thing clear here; there is no instrument on earth that can measure time / distant in age of any object. Carbon dating breaks down after 5000 years, in other words the usual practice is for Geologist, Anthropologist only take a guess at the age remember guess work is not a science. More over the different cultures who visited New Zealand varied Vikings, Celtic, Arab, Egyptian, plus many more…perhaps one has over looked the latter visitors visiting Queensland to include New Zealand, they also visited Tonga, Fiji, Tahiti, Samoa leaving gifts to the former natives (not Polynesian). Remember, Rapanui / Easter island settlers were not Polynesian either, there were three cultures over a period of time, none could speck the Polynesian dialect when Captain Cook visited Easter Island. Here’s another mystery: Whilst on the subject of Captain James Cook, it’s worth mentioning that ‘Cook’ did not discover New Zealand nor did the Dutch or Spanish as taught in schools and stated in history books. There is however written evidence that the British Admiralty handed Cook some Portuguese charts of the Southern Ocean with New Zealand and Australia already printed on them. These charts were put together by a Turkish Admiral Piri Reis and showed the northern and southern pack ice limits, even gave evidence to the Americas on both coasts from the north and down to include the Straits of Magellan, Tierra del Fuego and Cape Horn in the south plus the Falklands, South Georgia, Auckland, and South Shetland Islands including New Zealand and Australia. The British Admiralty commanded Cook to claim New Zealand and Australia for England, which he did in 1769 & 1770. Moreover, the ‘Piri Reis Charts’ were dated in 1422-3, that’s 98 years before Magellan (1520), 220 years before Abel Tasman (1642), 347 years before Cook’s arrival in the south Pacific (1769) and 70 years before Christopher Columbus’s discovery of the Americas (1492). All Cook had to do was to sail southward from Tahiti to reach latitude 37 – 38 degrees south then set a course westward (longitude hadn’t been discovered until Cook’s second voyage) to New Zealand, landing in Poverty Bay on the east coast on the 9th of October 1769, knowing that sooner or later he would reach land. The same applied when sailing towards Australia in (1770). (Some historians have dated the Poverty Bay landing as the 6th October 1769).

        Worthy of note:
        Admiral Piri Reis wasn’t the cartographer of these charts; they were either pirated, or purchased at a great price by the British Admiralty, as charts were jealously guarded and held in secret locations by their respected navies. If this holds true, who were the original cartographers? (Piri Reis, Harleian & Rotz charts, online). How did we gather such Knowledge; by doing, meeting the people whilst learning from the elders around the islands od the Pacific, Coral Seas, Aborigine, Melanesia, Canada 1988 Polynesian islands of Hawaii, 1990, Tahiti, 2000, Melanesia 2006 and many more too many to list here before sailing home to the Bay of Islands in our research vessel called ‘Sun Chaser’ so called simply because Polynesians chased the sun. Whilst on ‘FB’ for photos and video of our findings by writing the title ‘Before Maori NZ’s First Inhabitants’.

      2. i guess we can all believe in what we think is right even if it does sound crazy as.

  11. Another comment
    something that puzzled me in the early days was WHY there was so much inter tribal fighting and rivalry among-st these peoples who were supposed to have all come from the same place . I have thru over half a century established that they were brought to this country from all around the Pacific basin by the Chinese Greek Portuguese and Spanish and possibly by Phoenician not by canoe

  12. In 1862 Robertsons Bone mill came to the Kaipara and paid workers to collect the bones on this peninuslar
    fortunately the Armed Constabulary was based at Te Kopuru where they counted the skulls in each sack going on their records which still exist they counted over 60.000 skulls collected mainly from the feasting sites and cave sites. Fortunately they did not collect them all. As my grandfather was the original waggoner around the area and new of many cave sites still retaining bones.Some years ago I was at a conference down country where one of the speakers was a forensic pathologist with some 60 years of experience after the conference he had some spare time and came up here and I took him around to a number of sites where he examined many remains -he was taken aback about the Trepaning in a lot of the skulls and asked what are they doing here.When he went back to the UK he took with him an eyetooth and bones fragments and 18 months later thru DNA etc he established these peoples originated in Wales 3500 years ago — Noel Hilliam

  13. Kai Ora, all these questions mentioned above can be answered in the following research. here’s another to broaden ones mind… Traditions and customs:
    I asked a Maori Waikato University scholar as to how strong be the eastern Polynesian traditions such as Tahiti compared to Maoridom of New Zealand. “Very strong” she replied. “But, your very strong differs to mine so in fairness one should give a scale of say, one out of ten”. She then told me, “Ten plus”. “Okay, now I’m going to tell you a short story after which I’d like you to answer for me if you will. The Haida Indian of Queen Charlotte Islands in British Columbia, Canada as found by Captain James Cook to be friendly. Cook mentions in his log,” ‘They came out in their canoes chanting and scattering feather upon the water.’ “You see – the tossing of feather upon the water to the Haida Indian is their sign of peace whereas it’s the same here in Aotearoa / New Zealand using green leaves when challenged by Maori on their Marae. Moreover, the Haida Indian treated Cook his officers and crew respectively as gods, and yet when the same ship visited King George Island (now modern Tahiti) in eastern Polynesia the natives swam or paddled out in their canoes to Cooks ship, climbed aboard in droves whereby Cook was concerned that his ship may be taken over ordered the decks to be cleared. The share numbers of natives being forced over by the ship’s crew found just as many were boarding on the opposite and soon gave up. Suddenly, there was a lull whereby a young woman, presumed to be either a princess / priestess arrived aboard treating all visitors with an distinct loving kindness (Aloha / Aroha) even to the extent of offering lei’s/necklace of flowers to Cook, his officers and crew. Whilst the ship was in Tahiti the natives fornicated with those aboard to improve their blood stock, hence the reason why native warriors wanting a spouse went to neighbouring islands. The same applied when HMS Endeavour visited other Polynesian islands, having the same type of greetings, the ‘lei’s of flowers and the fornicating the same applied while in the Rarotonga Islands. Captain Cook’s next stop was Aotearoa / New Zealand. When HMS Endeavour arrived on the ninth of October 1769 on the east coast the ship’s crew were met with a hostile reception by Maori, in fact Cook ordered firearms to be issued to his officers to protect the shore party just in case. Why?”

    My scholar friend simply didn’t know. “But, you told me the Tahitian traditions were the same for Maori and you even gave me a ten plus, if the traditions of eastern Polynesia were to be the same for Maori one would have expected leis of flowers and a tender loving kindness as given by the queen of Tahiti but instead Cook and crew were given a hostile reception? Obviously this mean s Maori didn’t come from Eastern Polynesia as we have been led to believe, so where did the Maori actually come from? Source:

  14. The ancient pre Maori folk are still to be found in small pockets around New Zealand, and the people of Rapanui / Easter Islander were certainly not Polynesian as we have been led to believe. Now we have Harvard University Scholars x 2 telling us there were no pre Maori people and the Waitaha are just fictional stores / fairy tales. It seems these so called anthropologist passed their exams / test by covering the theory only and not the practical as well why? That’s like obtaining a pilot flying licence without ever flying an aircraft, that’s dumb. Now we have a Waikato University Scholars who believe Polynesian Maori came directly from Tahiti to New Zealand with Kupe this is proven to be an impossible voyage and the reason why are included within the pages of our 60 years of research to include our practical work by sailing the pacific ourselves. ‘Before Maori NZ’s First Inhabitants’ as an e-book

  15. Too much of our history has been hidden by those who have their own agenda. I think there are a handful that want to keep their snouts in the public trough and if our history was to do a 180 degree turn then there will be a lot of money having to be returned that has already been spent by the select few that only care about themselves and not the truth.

  16. Kia Ora, if we considered for a moment that the Patupaiarehe and other ancient beings recorded in all indigenous cultures are the Nephillim spoken of in the bible then this would all make sense. And of course the tangata whenua came from all over the world. Its not that far if you go follow water currents south and then turn right you are on the other side of the world. Hence the red haired Vikings of the south island. The history is clear we were definitely inhabited before Maori came and humans werent the only inhabitants.

      1. This video is an honest way to present to readers the proof there were other cultures living in New Zealand before the arrival of the Polynesian. Only one problem with this excellent footage being the time frame of discoveries, arrivals, departures as most up to now is only guess work. There were more than one migration to Aotearoa / New Zealand with the first breaking away from the main fleet either in Fijian waters where we personally sailed or coming by the way of New Caledonia (Fr) landing at the foot of Mt Taranki / Egmont on the West Coast of New Zealand. The other migrations (plural) came from Hawaii whilst others came by way of Rapanui / Easter Island the latter were not Polynesian as we have be led to believe.

  17. I read an article that was about arcaealogical finds in the Waipora forest on the Kaipara . It said that when the owners of the land were made aware of some of the results of carbon dating that implied tha the attifacts found predated the arrival of the Maori they had the site shut down & they then applied to, he High court to have the infomation suppressed for 75 years years. The site investigated appeared to have more similarities to an iron age western european settlement than a polynesian settlement from the same period . How would public opinion be affected by the news that europeans settled N.Z. first & were killed & possibly eaten by the Maoris upon their arrival . This of course is only a hypothesis but in the intrests of science & history the truth needs to come out.

    1. The Photographic Evidence:
      On the back cover of “Before Maori NZ’s First Inhabitants” mentions; ‘It has been recorded that old pre-Maori historical sites have been deliberately destroyed using bulldozers to cover burial sites, flattening stone walls and 2000 ancient dome dwellings. These factual sites have been carbon dated and believed to be 5000 years old. Why?
      On Thursday 28th of March 2013 Sylvia and I had a guided tour around such a site by one of these bulldozer drivers. We were totally “Gob Smacked” at what we were witnessing and I’m sure you will be too. Before us stood 6ft volcanic stone walls (not to be confused with modern stone fences). These went through native bush, down gullies and up again. The volcanic stone cairns with fist size stone in the centre, and the outer rim of larger rocks, obviously man-made. An ancient volcano stood nearby believed to have erupted five times hence the reason why the 360 degree surface being covered by fallen rock and surprisingly there before us stood a massive three sided earth pyramid without any volcanic rocks thus suggests it was formed after the five eruptions. On ANZAC DAY 2013 a small group climbed both volcano and Pyramid taking in a series of videos and photos as proof / evidence for all to see. QUESTION: Who built these structures, and for what reason were the walls used, who were these people obviously not Maori especially when no one was meant to be living in Aotearoa / New Zealand back then? If you have ‘Face book’ write in the title of our book ‘Before Maori NZ’s First Inhabitants’ to view more photos & videos of these amazing finds.

    2. Hello Tony
      I was one of the archaeologists working on the sites in the Waipoua Forest I have many photo.s -work started by 37 archaeologists in 1981 and in 1983 after nearly half a million dollars of taxpayers money went on these excavations original dating s came back showing 2500 BC ago there were people living here
      consequently thru assumption and greed the local Kaumatua whose grandfather was a Kanaka coming from Fortuna island being wrecked in a shipwreck 3 juine 1851 closed the whole site down and records deposited in wellington archives with a hold on them for 75 years. attempts over the years to get these released only a few sanitized results were forth coming and all original dating s have been destroyed – this what is going on in this Apartheid country –Noel Hilliam

      1. this action was mean and dirty,why I live in a place of betrayal and the lies they just go on,this factual evidence and artifacts hidden from the world, and the fact that the hard core facts are here in NZ, what the hell is wrong with these so called antropolgist archoligist etc alot of do as i say not as i do, and to top it off they they undermine facts from other evidential explorers of artifacts, oh they dont have the qualifications to give evidence there titles arnt high enough,family politics and money we are corrupt and fraudsters. well if this is fact NZ is probably at the very top of the world if the Egyptian GOD MAUI pulled the land from his fine waka, why theres a legend …

  18. I would run into the deep bush too if I thought I was going to end up in a pot of stew. What about the Moriori’s ? and the land in the north island that has been closed off that may give us answers to ancient NZ history ? Why is there such a need for so many secrets and covering up the true history here ?
    As has been said before, no group and no one dominates over nature and can own the air and the water
    etc. It is an arrogant illusion that any peoples have the right to dictate over the masses especially when they were not the first peoples here. I despise the racist/insulting word ===>> PAKEHA.

    1. Pakeha is a Maori word used to describe non maori. Get over it cos it will never be another word.

        1. What is the literal translation of Pakeha? And “non maori” covers an awful lot of different cultures and races. NZ is surely now well and truly multicultural, regardless of who settled here first?

    2. There are many Morioris still living in NZ formally from the Auckland Islands who once were slaves to the Maori collecting flax for the early European traders. The Last living Moriori was said to have died on the Chatham Islands some years ago , but it wasn’t known about the people on the Auckland Island until recently. The article was printed in the New Zealand Geographic magazine. Google the article.

  19. What about the Patupaiarehe? People with fair skin, blond or red hair and blue or grey eyes living here when the Maori arrived. Where did they come from? According to the history I was taught the Maori had no contact with Europeans, (fair skinned people) prior to the arrival of Capt Cook and his men, yet they had this story of the ‘fairy folk’.
    My ancestors when they arrived in Ireland met another group of people already living there who, according to legend, ended up being chased into the hills and becoming the fairy folk. Is that what happened here? The Maori arrive, find someone else already living here and the other people disappeared into the deep bush.

    1. Kia ora Vienne, There were folk here before captain Cook The only the only great hing captain cook did was bring more Europeans here, The French, Chinese, Americans, Nordic and Able Tasman were here a hundred years before he was even thought of, learn that history first, Yes their were pre Maori folk here you guys may have called them Elves at the time they were running around your country got sick of you guys and decided to hide out down here. The term Maori was given to us by the French because as usual white people have no ears and make up things to suit themselves, At the time of the arrival of the Europeans we were a pan tribal lot and just like the white man and his great divine wisdom decided to put us in a box and give us a name Maori which is actually was Wai Maori meaning fresh water, we are all the same, no colour, no leaders. Now all of a sudden we are getting blamed for wiping out patupaiarehe and all of a sudden all this white race has turned up out of no where and trying to lay claim it was their land, go figure that one out, even by these so called scholars and their divine wisdom the whole world was white. really come on talk about racial diversion, We never said we owned the land we said we look after the land there is a big difference.

      1. Hi Natanahira,
        Thanks for your comments, and yes there were indeed people here before Cook. I think the question is, how far back do we go to find who came to New Zealand/Aotearoa and when? I’m not so sure about your “white people have no ears” remark. How do you define “white people”? You are speaking about many nationalities and cultures, and some people listen more than others. I know many dark skinned people who are just as ignorant as those of paler skin, and conversely people of dark or white skin who are very aware and perceptive. You don’t mention our considerable population of Asian (“Yellow skin”) people, except to say they were here before Cook. Do they have ears?
        Personally I’m more interested in actual evidential truth than racial generalising and stereotypes.
        I would agree with you that Cook’s contribution is overrated though!
        Thanks for sharing your views Natanahira.

  20. At last some common sense. For much too long our governments have hidden, lost, purposely destroyed, lied about, kept the peace to hold onto majority votes and ignored clear evidence of pre Maori civilizations in NZ. We have been betrayed by our educators, lied to by our leaders, mocked by our neighbour nations and silenced from speaking out publicly concerning these issues. As Kiwis, we are tired of living a lie. It is time to find out the truth of NZ’s past and at least allow our future generations to face the world with a clear knowledge of their own roots and history.

Comments are closed.

Next Post

Madsen - Government Jamming N.O. Communications Links

Tue Sep 6 , 2005
Source: Reports continue that communications in and around New Orleans are being purposely jammed (and severed) by the US government (see Sep. 2 article below). The jamming is having an adverse impact on emergency, disaster recovery, and news media communications. The jamming is even affecting police radio frequencies in […]

You May Like