168 JOURNAL OF SCIENCE. 
close attention what has been written on the subject under 
review, or totally misunderstood the points at issue. On page 
59 he observes that, whilst I state that only two representations 
of man can be recognised, human figures are in hundreds. I 
only was then speaking of the ved paintings, but afterwards 
observed, on page 51 of the “Transactions of New Zealand,” 
vol. X., that by far the greatest part of the d/ack paintings 
represent the human figure, and I offered at the same time a 
description of them. Mr. Maskell speaks lightly of the Maori 
traditions concerning these paintings, although in other cases, he 
thinks, they are of some value; but he forgets to point out that 
the Maori traditions are remarkably in accord with the character 
and antiquity of the paintings. The Parihika (Opihi) speci- 
mens are attributed to the younger Ngatimamoe, whilst those of 
the Waikari to the older tribe or race, the Ngapuhi—an uncon- 
scious confirmation of the evidence before us. Mr. Maskell — 
gives us his belief, “that the rock-paintings are simply the work 
of some Maori artist or artists, not necessarily done at any one 
time, by no means of any great antiquity, and without any 
particular collective meaning.” In fact, he compares them with | 
the scrawls and figures of schoolboys. He does not bring one 
single palpable reason to support this belief, and which we have 
therefore to take for what it is worth. 
Now let us see what Mr. Maskell says on the very point, in 
the first part of his paper, on page 30 :—“ The theory adopted 
by some of our number was, that the red ones were the oldest, 
or, to use the phrase adopted, ‘ really archaic’; that the filled up 
black ones, looking as if daubed on with the thumb, were less 
ancient, and that the black outlines were the most modern of the 
three.” 
Has my reviewer ever seen other Maori paintings? Are 
those of the Weka Pass rock shelter similar to them? And in 
what way do they prove to be of similar origin? I fear very 
much Mr. Maskell does not know any others, and only hazards 
some statements without any proof. For instance, where are 
the scrolls so characteristic of Maori art, to which the Rev. J. 
W. Stack has drawn attention? Moreover, Mr. Maskell does 
not account for the very curious, and to my mind conclusive, 
fact, that none of the Weka Pass drawings are indecent, while 
Maori drawings and carvings invariably are. 
Coming to the question asked by Mr. Maskell on page 57, 
whether the prevailing winds between Ceylon and here would ~ 
allow Cingalese vessels to reach New Zealand ? he answers his 
own question on the very next page :—“ From 1497, the year 
when the ships of Portugal first drove before the westerly winds — 
of the Indian Ocean, to 1769, the year when Cook landed in 
New Zealand, surely there is scope and to spare for scores of — 
European ships, . . . . which might or might not have 
left, or lost by. stealing, various articles and implements.” = 
One might suppose that these westerly winds propelling 
European ships to New Zealand were also strong enough to 
