"This political correctness crap which is so undemocratic has stopped me from speaking out for long enough. It's been a big cover up."
- Noel Hilliam (Historian and Marine archeologist) Interview in the Dargaville & District News 10 November 2010
The above caught my attention this morning when I received my copy of the weekly Dargaville & Districts News.
There it was with the headliner 'Maori weren't first says book' According to Noel Hillian who has written a yet to be published book titled "To the Ends of The Earth' 'Greeks, followed by 'three other ethnic groups arrived before the Maori Migration'.
Apparently this claim is supported by 'earth shattering evidence to prove it'. Further the article goes on to quote Mr Hilliam as saying that his book 'is being published to tell the early history of the settlement of New Zealand' He goes on further to elaborate the ' he has evidence dating back 5000 years, and believes further proof may be evident in the genetic makeup of some of the Dargaville Maori'.
He claims further that 'so many Maori names are actually Spanish and Portuguese. A lot of these people do not know their true background'. Excuse me? Then the Whakapapa I have in my possession for my Kaitahu ancestors is a forgery? Or perhaps they 'did not understand their true origins' after all?
I can trace my ancestry back beyond Kupe to the ancestors at Hawaiki there is no mention anywhere of any 'Spanish' or 'Portuguese' type names anywhere to be found.
In short I find it very hard to believe, that despite there being a strong indication of Maori occupancy in New Zealand for at least 2000 years, that suddenly, we have ancient greeks, spanish and portuguese being the first to settle the Shaky Isles.
Am I an ignorant Philistine here? Should I take this seriously? Has an expert in ancient languages been engaged to do a detailed indepth study of Maori language and place names?
I'm of the mind I have to place this in the category of the 'Aliens Built the Pyramids ' Section of my brain compartment.
There is nothing politically correct about my opinion on this at all. I disagree strongly. If the proper and true scientific and archeological evidence can be produced by those in that field, then perhaps, I might change my point of view. But at this stage - it's little more than pseudo history and I can't take this as proven fact.
Psuedo History is a damaging and dangerous thing to my mind. I'll go back under my rock now and keep any further opinions to my self.
I actually like Mr Hilliam - but on this I cannot agree with him at all. Nor do I like the patronising tone that my ancestors did not understand their own origins. Yes they did and still do.
I rest my case. What do you think? Opinions are welcome.