He Waka Tipua | Manatū Taonga | Ministry for Culture & Heritage

He waka tipua ki Awanui, He waka tahito ki Awaroa!

Maiea! Maiea!
Te whakatinana mai o ngā mahi a ngā tīpuna.
Mā te waka tātau katoa e tūhono
He waka tipua ki Awanui
He waka tahito ki Awaroa.
I kauia e Te Rangimātuitui
Mairanga! Mairanga!
Te toronga mai o ngā kāwai-tangere-kiwa!
Kua oho te whatu o Tūmatatangaroa
Mairanga! Mairanga!
E tū te hoe o Te Nonoikura
Kei ngaro te ahureinga.
I te karawhiu a te toki takahuri kohu
Me Rongo!

He mihi

E Pouariki, oi!
Tokina mai au – ei, ei!
E ka ki ku’ rung’ o Pouariki
E kei e ke ro ...

Pokai ta uru o ta moana, ko moana nui, ko moana rū. Pokai ta uru o tche henu’, ko ta manawa o tche henu’. Ko Rangitaumuai – taumuai rung’, taumuai raro, taumuai roto, taumuai waho. E henua hou rongo, e waka ieriki–ieriki, e waka hou rongo. K’ rahi ti mihi i kā imi, kā kaing’, kā tchakat, kā tchimirik, ko mokopu – mō kotou ta uiho āpō. Hokomenetai. Me rongo.

Hoea, hoea te waka o Tamarereti ki waho ki te moana, hou parati!
Hou parati!
Hou parati – hou!

Ka rere ēnei kōrero i runga i ngā tai o mihi ki a koutou katoa e ngā mana, e ngā tapu, e ngā rangatira huri noa, huri noa e whakakanohi nei i a kui mā, a koro mā. Tau ārai te pō, ko te tai pō ki a rātau. Ko te tai awatea ki a tātau – tītoko i te ao mārama. Tihei mauri ora!

Purpose

Manatū Taonga Ministry for Culture and Heritage has commissioned this report and tasked us to provide observations and insights on the potential provenance of the waka partially excavated on Rēkohu-Wharekauri-Chatham Island and leverage our various areas of expertise to inform and guide provenance research and documentation regarding the waka.

As specified in the terms of reference, the specific objectives are ‘to focus on cultural provenance, and:

To offer observations based on respective areas of expertise on the cultural significance and potential provenance of the waka.
To assist in the identification and authentication of carving, weaving or other unique features. ’

Two triangular wooden structures set up on a beach. The structures are holding another wooden box that is suspended by rope. Several orange buckets are palced around an area in the sand covered with wooden planks. There are tents and people in the background. — Rēkohu-Wharekauri-Chatham Island waka excavation site.

Background

In preparing this report we were provided with conservation documentation, the interim archaeological report and photographic records of the waka.

We spent the week of 21 April 2025 on Rēkohu-Wharekauri-Chatham Island. We met with representatives from Hokotehi Moriori Trust and Moriori Imi Settlement Trust, and representatives from Ngāti Mutunga o Wharekauri.

We also met with Vince and Nikau Dix and visited the find site to gain a first- hand understanding of the character of the location and to view the pieces of the waka that have been excavated to date. This work was supported by the conservator, Sara Gainsford, and by the on-island conservation support team.

Seven people gathered on a sand dune with grasses in the background. Some are talking with each other, others are walking down the slope. — Report authors visiting Rēkohu-Wharekura-Chatham Island.

Te Hono ki Tangere-Kiwa

Tangere-Kiwa is a term that this report uses to reference the embodiment of the people from the old world who built, used and cared for the waka. Tangere (also known as takere) is a generic term used across the Pacific for the keel of the canoe. Kiwa represents the common ancestry of the Pacific peoples. We see the waka as an embodiment of Te Moana Nui a Kiwa and its peoples over time. It is the tāhuhu, the structural support of the waka and a tuara, backbone or spine, that interlocks peoples across the Pacific.

First and foremost, having viewed the pieces recovered to date, we consider that they are indeed in keeping with expectations of a waka of pre-European construction.

Although without substantial archaeological comparison, all the elements are within the range expected of ethnographically and archivally documented waka construction and artistic style. There were no features seen by us that would suggest a different cultural origin. Given this we are in no doubt that the pieces do indeed derive from a waka constructed of stitched-together segments and originating from this part of Te Moana Nui a Kiwa.

In this sense, the excavated waka pieces provide a new perspective in regard to the narrative of Te Moana Nui a Kiwa. It represents the materialisation of kōrero tuku iho, the reinforcement of tārai waka practice and, very likely, an affirmation of voyaging tradition. It is of a type of historical technological innovation for which there is only scant archaeological evidence provided by a few other known examples, and nothing of the volume and breadth of recovery that this waka already displays. This report considers what this means and what must be further found out as a result.

Wooden pieces of different shapes sitting inside a rectangular hole cut into the sand. — Waka pieces in situ at excavation site.

He Waka Tuitui

Waka tuitui is an old term for a planked waka that has been stitched together. This section considers the physical components and presentation of the parts of the waka which have been excavated.

The evolution of waka locally saw Tangere-Kiwa make use of readily available resources. On the Aotearoa New Zealand mainland, the availability of large trees such as giant kauri and tōtara saw planked waka technology give way to the large single-hull dugouts that early European voyagers observed upon coming to our shores. The technological shift between the waka of Tangere-Kiwa arrivals, their adaptation to using local materials and the canoes seen by the first European arrivals resulted in the contemporary waka form that is such an iconic feature of te ao Māori.

In contrast, based on what has been found to date, the waka on Rēkohu- Wharekauri-Chatham Island is unique. Many familiar parts and techniques have been used in the construction of this waka. Equally, however, there are parts and techniques that remain obscured by the passage of time. The opportunity to learn, recalibrate and revitalise these techniques is one that should not be taken lightly. We know Tangere-Kiwa made waka like this, but we have never had a single unified example from one archaeological find that may comprehensively bridge the gap between Tangere-Kiwa technologies and what is used in tārai waka practice across the Pacific today.

Drawing on the recovered waka elements that we have already viewed, there is now the potential to move beyond the scope of piecemeal scholastic reconstruction and imaginative innovation in crafting new waka.

The Rēkohu-Wharekauri-Chatham Island waka has elements that could have only been constructed using toki. Several waka hulls and fragments of waka have been archaeologically recovered in Aotearoa New Zealand. While these show some of the variability in waka Māori shapes, they are mostly of a dugout form and of a size suggestive of river, harbour or sheltered coastal use (e.g., Irwin et al. 2017).

A plank of a stitched waka recovered from a swamp in Anaweka, north Westland, was the only fragment found in Aotearoa New Zealand confidently identified as of a ‘voyaging’ waka up until the Rēkohu-Wharekauri-Chatham Island find. Before that, the closest anyone has come to discovering a buried voyaging canoe in this part of Te Moana Nui a Kiwa was a group of planks, a mast and steering paddle found in the 1970s and 1980s on Huahine, Tahiti, by Y. Sinoto of the Bishop Museum (Finney, 2006:103). The Rēkohu-Wharekauri-Chatham Island waka shows obscure aspects of waka technology that are used across the Pacific but have not previously been archaeologically found together. Features such as stringers, keels and lashed components are recognisable, but aspects of them have not been used locally (Aotearoa New Zealand and Rēkohu-Wharekauri-Chatham Islands) in this form in living memory.

There is still a lot of analysis that must happen to shape and inform the interpretations. There are clear indications of whopping great big pieces of waka, but we do not yet have clarity as to length or cross-section. This leaves unanswered major questions around what the waka is, its size and style, and from that its use and likely history. These issues are crucial to developing an understanding of the more detailed provenance of the waka, and it would be irresponsible to make assumptions without securing that information.

Toi ahuahu
Toi o te ahureinga!

Regarding art, aesthetics, whakairo, and the mātauranga within them, we have relatively few taonga, and fewer miheke, with which to compare those found on the Rēkohu-Wharekauri-Chatham Island waka. The honu (turtle) motif carved in relief on the Anaweka waka plank (see Anderson 2014a:58–9) unequivocally demonstrates that waka tuitui in our part of the Pacific did feature artistic/symbolic embellishments. The fine edge notching of some wooden elements is an artistic motif applied to carvings and ornaments throughout motu in the eastern parts of Te Moana Nui a Kiwa. The same can be said for inlays of other material – in this case, pāua shell and matā (obsidian), although more typically on waka in more tropical latitudes pearl shell inlays were used. The bands of rectilinear hatching on the Rēkohu-Wharekauri-Chatham Island waka are uncommon in more recent whakairo Māori (carving) but do have comparison in some taonga attributed to early pre-European times, such as a canoe bow cover from Taranaki (Mead 1984:220; Anderson 2014b:73) and taurapa (sternpost) from Waikato (Mead 1984:192).

Whakairo houses all our systems of knowledge, and we are unable to read the patterns properly unless we have as full a display as possible so we can understand what Tangere-Kiwa are telling us. There are elements of te tū o te ahureinga – the uniqueness of the medium – which are aesthetically pleasing but also functional.

The engineering is in the eye, formed from nature by Toi Ariki (ultimate artisan) who envisaged a waka tipua, a vessel of great magnitude, then set about using all their power and resources to will it into existence. These elements will only be able to be fully appreciated if the rest of the waka emerges.

Regarding fibres and textiles, not enough material has been uncovered to ascertain the purpose of the fibres found. There needs to be a process of elimination to compare plant materials of the Pacific. The 3-ply plait viewed is a general technique used all over the world. Some lashings and matting have been recovered, but not enough to draw any strong conclusion as to its wider form and purpose. We see it as urgent to recover any remaining fibres and understand their character. The presence or absence of lashings and whether there is evidence of them being broken rather than cut may indicate that the waka was broken apart as a wreck or purposefully disassembled and buried.

We have used the term ‘voyaging’ waka, for example in reference to that found at Huahine, and referred to artistic styles that appear ‘early’ in Aotearoa New Zealand’s history. However, it is important to emphasise that the antiquity of this waka is not at all well-determined. We know archaeologically that the first footfall in mainland Aotearoa New Zealand was around 800 years ago, and that those on Rēkohu- Wharekauri-Chatham Island, Rangitāhua (the Kermadec Islands) and Maungahuka (the subantarctic Auckland Islands) were about the same time. What is less clear is the extent of inter-archipelago voyaging and how long that may have persisted for.

Traditions do talk of return voyaging back to Hawaiki. Notwithstanding different scholastic arguments on the feasibility of that, the question of if and for how long the technology and knowledge for inter-archipelago voyaging may have been sustained across our southern motu has not yet been answered. Given this, if this waka was designed for inter-archipelago travel, it could be as old as first footfall or potentially a few hundred years younger. Quite simply, there are no large coastal or inter-island voyaging canoes known to be say 400–500 years old with which the components of this find can be compared.

While noting the above, we do however consider it likely that this waka is from a time before significant cultural separation in the Pacific; from a time before geographic distance and the decrease of long-distance voyaging meant independently developed techniques and artistic styles emerged. In part this is reflected in the planked construction, and in the rectilinear character and notching of the ornamental features which is often associated with early pre-European taonga. As the cultural materials change across different environments this influences innovation and technology, and cultural norms shift artistic styles. The antiquity of the waka is hinted at in the lashings, notching, inlays and whakairo we viewed.

A close up view of a wooden piece of waka covered in sand. There are dark black shiny circular inlays in the wood. — Waka pieces.

E tū te hoe o Te Nonoikura

Te Whatu o Tangaroa – we know enough to know what we have not got.

This section speaks to the urgency and necessity of further excavation if the more comprehensive story of the waka is to be recovered. Should the community on the Island wish it and is appropriately supported to do so, the emphasis now should be on the urgent recovery of the remainder of the waka and ensuring the island is supported for its long-term care. We have seen enough to at least know that this find is incredible for Aotearoa New Zealand’s and the wider Pacific’s heritage landscape.

We do not believe that it is necessary to wait for other scientific studies (such as radiocarbon dating, isotype analysis, etc.) to be completed to justify the urgent recovery of the remainder of the waka. Rather, we are confident that the observations drawn from the preliminary archaeological insights, given our understanding of waka construction and the expertise in Māori and Pacific material culture that has been applied already, are more than sufficient to acknowledge the notable character and significance of the find.

In our view, further scientific analysis and research should not be rushed using only the material recovered to date. Better selections can be made of what to test and with what priority if the complete waka is recovered. Future scientific enquiry on such an extraordinary taonga promises to be a long and extensive process.

The results will be notably sounder if this work follows full and proper recovery. For example, we should not jump to conclusions on provenance based on a selection of wooden elements, especially if parts of the waka that have not yet been recovered may potentially be made of different kinds of wood that were separately sourced by Tangere-Kiwa. Similarly, while a matā (obsidian) inlay has a green hue typical of Tūhua (Mayor Island, Bay of Plenty), sourcing studies should look at obsidian broadly across the Pacific and not just local reference points. Such studies are important to developing the kōrero that attach to this waka, which speaks to the fact that robust detailed provenance observations will not be able to be drawn from incomplete sampling and cautions against coming to premature conclusions on the life history and provenance of the waka.

There is a question of how much works need to be done to land at the point where the waka can be confidently attributed to an era. We do not know how long Tangere-Kiwa maintained inter-island voyaging practices. We do have in waka practice today remnant technology of what this waka presented. With sizeable trees in Aotearoa New Zealand, Tangere-Kiwa no longer needed to use the planking technology to the extent seen on the waka. Nonetheless, waka practice today does employ some of the technology seen in the Rēkohu-Wharekauri-Chatham Island waka. So, we do not know if this is an early waka that Tangere-Kiwa arrived in or if it is from a later era. Answering this question will provide powerful insights into modern debates on the settlement of this part of the Pacific.

Currently, there are too many unknown variables to make absolute statements on how the waka was deposited. If it can be recovered it could give insight into what Tangere-Kiwa did. Recovery would also help with future decision-making around the waka. The nation should accept responsibility for ensuring that the whole of the waka is recovered with urgency and support the island to do this.

Vince and Nikau Dix (who farm the property adjacent to the coastal site of the find, which is on Department of Conservation land) have shown us the landscape and its vulnerability. Having visited the site and listened to local knowledge of environmental conditions and observations of the – often dramatic – seasonal change over time, we can sympathise with local opinion that the recovery of the remainder of the waka is a matter of the utmost urgency.

The nation should accept responsibility for ensuring that the whole of the waka is recovered with urgency and support the island to do this.

A row of white sand bags are placed along a small channel to block water running towards the excavation site from the sea. — Rēkohu-Wharekauri-Chatham Island Waka excavation site.

He ihu waka i tō mai i te pō

In this section we provide our overall observations on the importance of the waka and make observations on potential next steps.

This is an internationally significant find which needs significant funding. Based on the observations that have been pulled together in this report, this is an opportunity that the nation and Te Moana Nui a Kiwa cannot afford to pass up. This find may be a key to the voyaging traditions of the human race – or it may not – but we need to find out one way or the other. It would be an indictment on the nation if we did not take responsibility for what has been uncovered on Aotearoa New Zealand’s shores.

This waka may allow us to make profound new contributions to the kōrero of the peopling of the Pacific and the practitioners of voyaging. It has the potential to stand alongside other markers that identify us at an international level, such as tā moko, wharewhakairo, kōhanga reo, contemporary Māori art, and kapa haka.

This find may be a key to the voyaging traditions of the human race.

The recovery of the waka, without compromise to its physical integrity, is crucial for both respecting its heritage value and acknowledging the mana of the taonga.

The community on the island, and the archaeology and conservation teams, need to have the scope and ability to undertake the recovery without being compromised by either time or resource pressures. The best practice and highest standard of care must be enabled, which can only be done if the recovery programme is resourced properly for its full duration, including subsequent treatment of the taonga recovered.

The government should invest in the local community with urgency. We can see that the community supporting the project on the island has an urgent need for more appropriate interim facilities for what has been recovered to date (such as a shed for storage and conservation close to the find site), so that this work can move forward more efficiently and effectively than it has so far. Current facilities are borderline appropriate but are not reflective of the mana and tapu of this waka. We can see the importance of the recovered pieces remaining housed where they are now, close to the find site, but these facilities are only interim measures and need to be improved immediately.

If the other pieces are to be recovered urgently, more and better facilities will be needed immediately. The word ‘interim’ should be read to mean ‘semi-permanent’ until a full excavation is completed, as what is needed will not be known until the rest of the waka is recovered and evaluated.

The kaupapa can and should be for everyone. There is huge opportunity for local community development and industry. What opportunities do the community want to realise? Looking to the long term, there is clearly benefit in a whole of community approach to developing shared communications around the waka. Until wider questions of cultural origin and provenance have been fully addressed – an extensive process that will require further recovery work and subsequent research – the government should continue at this stage to include everyone involved in the project in decision-making processes.

If no further archaeological recovery was undertaken, the civil works to properly secure the find site – where further parts of the waka are known to be – would be enormous. On the other hand, if the waka is to be further excavated, this will be difficult if the work is undertaken over several fieldwork seasons. That approach would force fieldwork decisions that would pose a significant risk of damaging the integrity and impacting the mauri of this incredible treasure. Rather, the resources should be provided to ensure the full recovery can be done relatively quickly and in a continual seamless process. There are various options to consider following excavation – for example, comprehensive photographic recording, scanning and 3D modelling of everything could be undertaken prior to returning the taonga to the ground if it proves to be associated with significant burials. This level of recording would be a huge undertaking. Alternatively, once excavated and conserved, the taonga could be maintained for storage and eventual display. This is an extremely long-term option, and the community must think about the human resources that would be needed to sustain it.

This kaupapa has great potential as a long-term unifying community initiative. The discovery of the waka has very fortunately happened at a time when the technology and the people to have the work done exist on Rēkohu-Wharekauri-Chatham Island, should the imi, iwi and wider community wish, and if it is resourced properly.

There are many questions and learnings and opportunities on offer if enough of what is already recognisable as a national treasure of profound significance can be recovered in time. Action is urgently required so Aotearoa New Zealand does not lose this incredible opportunity to find out more about ourselves as a Pacific nation.

This taonga has the potential to be a stepping stone to where we should go next in understanding this foundational part of our past that is still veiled by the mists of time. The waka may allow us and our neighbours to peer through some of that veil.

Kei whakahua mai
“He kuru pounamu i takarea noa!”

Three people dressed in waterproof clothing and gumboots are looking down into a creek. Past long grasses, a beach can be seen in the distance. — Dr Kahutoi Te Kanawa, Professor Sir Derek Lardelli and Nikau Dix at the creek near the excavation site.

References cited

Anderson, A., 2014a. Speaking of Migration. In Anderson, A., Binney J., Harris, A. Tangata Whenua: An Illustrated History.Wellington: Bridget Williams Books.

Anderson, A., 2014b. Pieces of the Past. In Anderson, A., Binney J., Harris, A. Tangata Whenua: An Illustrated History.Wellington: Bridget Williams Books.

Finney, B., 2006. Ocean Sailing Canoes. In Howe K.R. (ed). Vaka moana: Voyages of the Ancestors. Auckland: David Bateman Ltd.

Irwin, G., Johns, D., Flay, R.G.J, Munaro, F., Sung, Y. & Mackrell, T., 2017. A Review of Archaeological Māori Canoes (Waka) Reveals Changes in Sailing Technology and Maritime Communications in Aotearoa/New Zealand, AD 1300–1800. Journal of Pacific Archaeology 8(2).

Mead, Sidney Moko, 1984. Te Maori: Maori Art from New Zealand Collections. New York: Harry N. Abrams Inc.