Whakapapa as indigenous method of naming exemplified in Appendix 1 and Appendix

Mātauranga Māori generally and mātauranga ā-hapū specifically continue to be regenerated in the art of naming to symbolise, conceptualise and order mātauranga Māori about the world and our part in it. Names are attributed to people, events, periods of time, processes, places, features of the landscape and ecology, man-made objects and metaphysical qualities that position them within indigenous ontology and epistemology (Roberts, 2010; Walker, 1969). Therefore, names within indigenous epistemology are points of association that describe reality as relational. The description of indigenous methods of naming provided by Walker (1969, p. 405) is particularly relevant to an understanding of the role of names in Te Rangikāheke’s oral literature:

personal and place names were of functional significance in pre- literate Māori society as the fixed points of reference for orally transmitted traditions. They were immutable, tangible markers of tradition. However much details of traditions were exaggerated, embellished or minimised (e.g. numbers killed in victory or loss

14 _{With the exception of the narratives of Māui which are told employing techniques of appositional}

sustained in defeat) the main events were kept intact through their association with personal or a place name. In this way proper names were a reminder of the past and constitute guides for future action.

In Appendix 2 the reader is introduced to protagonists as they become active in the narrative. The reader adopts a subjective rather than overall perspective of the progression of events and naming occurs in association with actions and relationships. Te Rangikāheke often summarises and repeats the attribution of significant events with the names of the protagonists. The naming of Tāwhiri’s offspring beginning with the prefix ‘Ao’ denotes their common origin, unique name endings distinguish each offspring (Grey, 1853, p. xxii). This method of naming is consistent for the son’s of Taranga (Grey, 1853). Common prefix in names denotes commonality but does not always indicate unique identities, for example, Te Rangikāheke explicitly states that Tūtewehiwehi and Tūtewanawana are two names for the one entity (Grey, 1853, p. xii). Naming in narrative whakapapa is indicative of ontology. For example, in the context of the Māui narrative, Te Ika a Māui is simultaneously Papatūānuku and a fish. In this way identity and naming relies on association with action, the fishing up, the emergence of Aotearoa New Zealand from the sea. The name in narrative describes Te Ika a Māui as a portion of Papatūānuku herself (Thornton, 1987). Similarly, the fishing up of pounamu in the narratives of Poutini and Whaiapū is also ontologically identified as a portion of Papatūānuku (Thornton, 1987). Ontology is thus derived from whakapapa origins while attribution of different names to the one entity at different periods in time indicates a specific context or the status of change in the process of becoming. The dynamic of duality is a repeated theme throughout Te Rangikāheke’s narratives and articulated in association with names. In Appendix 2, Te Rangikāheke describes the actions of protagonists in the context of two choices; the offspring of Ranginuietūnei and Papatūānuku are divided by the choice to conserve the current state of being or radically change it. The descendants of Houmaitawhiti choose between peace and war, to stay in Hawaiki or to establish themselves in Aotearoa New Zealand (Jackson, 1968). In Appendix 2, Hine-nui-te-pō is the ancestor from whom Māui retrieves fire and the ancestor from whom Māui attempts to gain

immortality. The naming of Hine-nui-te-pō in the narratives of Māui concisely recounted by Te Rangikāheke provides an even and literal gender opposition to Māui’s successful taming of Tama-nui-te-rā. Indeed, duality and division are the regenerating forces of whakapapa (Jackson, 1968).

In the narrative of the separation of Ranginuietūnei and Papatūānuku in Appendix

2 are points of reference to describe the dynamics of ecology and principles for the

human use of natural resources (Jackson, 1968). Reactions to the separation are personalised with the naming of offspring and their choice to hide or attack. In this way names are also associated with opposing locations such as whenua, rangi, “ki uta, ki tai” (Grey, 1853, p. xxxii). Mediators present a negotiation between binary opposite positions. Jackson (1968, p. 156) explains “Māui as the mediator brings about a conciliatory relationship between birth and death, parents and children, culture and nature, that was previously established as more dialectical in the narratives of Nga tama a Rangi”.

In Appendix 1, names remain associated with actions but narratives are summarised to feature significant outcomes and some descriptions are omitted. In Appendix 2, Māui is synonymous with the duration of daylight, the emergence of Aotearoa New Zealand from the sea, human use of fire and mortality as the natural order as well as the themes of innovation and conservation. Many place names throughout Aotearoa New Zealand are dedicated to Māui and are geographic and cartographic memorials to the narratives of the process of fishing up Te Ika a Māui. Ngahue and pounamu are associated with the identification of Aotearoa New Zealand as a potential location for immigration. Ohomairangi, Te Arawa, Tamatekapua, Ngātoroirangi and many other names are immediately associated with the immigration of first settlers of Te Arawa waka to Aotearoa New Zealand. Toponyms from Maketu to Tongariro and other locations associated with Tamatekapua and Ngātoroirangi, Ihenga, Kuiwai and Haungaroa and more are explained in the context of early inland exploration and settlement and identify geographies with ancestors and ecologies by name. As such, names in the context of whakapapa are simultaneously performance cartography as well as the nomenclature of indigenous societies which include eponymous ancestors in the context of settlement and dispersion (Metge, 1990; Roberts, 2010; Salmond, 1983).

The prominence of recital whakapapa in Appendix 2, demonstrates how names are concentrated points of reference, an economy of language for recital. The enumeration of names or the repetition of names in recital whakapapa, builds tension as well as describing a lengthy and gradual process of becoming (Thornton, 1987). Those already familiar with the contexts and details of mātauranga Māori and whakapapa implicitly associate names with events, actions, significant relationships and more. The association of names with significant events and principles of action enable orators like Te Rangikāheke to recount narratives from different points in time, Maui in Appendix 2 relies on prior knowledge of the narrative on the part of the intended readership and demonstrates Te Rangikāheke’s skill in oratory (Thornton, 1987). This exemplifies memory arts as creative recounting and performance while names and whakapapa conserve consistency in intergenerational transmission of mātauranga Māori (Jackson, 1968; Walker, 1969).