HoNGi. — Maori Numeration. 625 



Art. LXIII. — Maori Numeration : Being a Reply to Mr. Elsdon Best's 

 Paper on " Maori Numeration " in Trans. N.Z. Inst., Vol. xxxix. 



Bv Hare Hoxgi. 



Communicated by A. Hamilton. 



[Read befoie the Wellington Philosophical Society, Isi September, 1909.] 



In view of the splendid contributions to science which this Institute has 

 from time to time published in its Transactions and Proceedings, many of 

 which I have read, I have very much pleasure indeed, and no Httle diffi- 

 dence, in submitting for consideration an essay of a somewhat critical nature 

 on the subject of Maori numeration. Whilst, however, conceding that 

 many subjects discussed by the Institute are necessarily of a controversial 

 character — that of the moa-bird, for instance, no living specimens of which 

 have been accessible to students — I should like to make my present position 

 quite clear by stating at the outset that there is no important subject in 

 which I myself am interested so little open to controversial and argu- 

 mentative discussion as that of Maori numeration. Looking back through 

 the century of years just closed, we see its ample field crowded with living 

 Native specimens, with wise men having a just knowledge of this particular 

 subject, and a knowledge which has been readily imparted to the inquirer. 

 Not only so, but the Maori is a keen, an eager debater and controversialist : 

 some of his finest literary remains are found to-day in what are known as 

 "disputation songs" — i.e., waiata tautohetohe, or waiata tautitotito. A 

 great advocate for " correct forms," one of the readiest phrases which fell 

 from the lips of the elders was " Kia tiJca," or " Be exact." And so, al- 

 though disputes have been waged abroad on a thousand-and-one subjects 

 of historical uncertainty and interest — such as that of descent, ancestry, 

 traditional canoes, the introduction of the kumara tuber, causes of inter- 

 tribal warfare, women, lands, and even to so minute a question as the in- 

 terpretation of an historical passage or the primary meaning of a certain 

 historical term — no marked disputation concerning either principle or detail 

 of the system of numeration as regularly taught and practised by him has 

 been recorded. The inference is obvious. The Maori system of numeration 

 as generally known is at once so methodical in its arrangements, so well 

 defined in its parts, and so comprehensive in its form that apparently no 

 sufficient ground for disputation has presented itself. 



These preliminary observations are suggested by the recent perusal of 

 an article on Maori nimieration, by Mr. Elsdon Best, which appears in the 

 Transactions of this Institute (vol. xxxix, p. 150). Mr. Best has been long 

 and very favourably known as a sturdy contributor to the pages of Maori 

 literature, and containing, as his productions usually do, a large proportion 

 of purely Native material, he has placed on record a quantity of most in- 

 teresting, useful, and highly informing original Native matter. In the 

 voluminous article under notice, however, it is strikingly apparent that 

 Mr. Best has deviated widely from his usual course. The Native originals 

 which he presents are comparatively few, and those few unimportant and 

 misleading. He wanders far outside the area of Maori research, and, as a 

 consequence, he appears to have done himself and his subject alike a very 

 grave injustice. In the weakness of his authorities, in the enlarging of his 

 field, and in labouring to prove that which is not possible, Mr. Best exhibits 



