THE SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC SITUATION OF HAURAKI MAORI AFTER COLONISATION

Early observations

2.5 In 1769 James Cook noted that while there were several villages on the Waihou river, there were no cultivations and the population was not numerous. Edgar Dell of the Fancy, however, observed in the mid-179os large numbers on the Waihou and estimated that between 1,5oo and 2,000 people were gathered at a particular place where 117 canoes were also seen. A few years later, in 1801, William Wilson on the Royal Admiral estimated that some 4,000-5,000 people were gathered at Oruarangi ready to go to war, but his estimates for particular villages are in the lower hundreds. Considerably later, in 1820, the missionary John Butler counted zo villages in the vicinity of Mokoia and estimated their population at 4,000. In 1832 Henry Williams found evidence of depopulation on the east coast of the peninsula following the Ngapuhi raids; in 1833, he found few people on the west side of the Firth and noted that while villages were numerous they were in ruins. His brother, William, made a more precise report for the district he called 'the Thames' in 1838 indicating a population of 4,800. In 1841, Ernest Dieffenbach put the population of `Marutuahu' at 5,000, but must have been relying upon information from others (Furey, Archaeology in the Hauraki Region, and for the two following paragraphs).

z.6 Evidence from contemporaries suggests a high level of depopulation and out-migration during the 182os and 183os, thanks in good measure to the series of Ngapuhi raids from the north during the early part of this period. Many Hauraki people appear to have left to live rather uneasily with Ngati Haua to the south. They returned to their lands from time to time 'to keep the fires lit' and moved back in some numbers after the raids were over. Further, deaths in battle were numerous and many were taken north as slaves for plantation labour. In the late 185os Fenton noticed a scarcity of women around the Thames, Coromandel and Waiheke districts; whatever the reason may have been (Fenton suggested they were drawn to the opportunities of Auckland) their absence could have had an adverse effect upon fertility

2.7 These reports suggest that the region was, in normal times, fairly populous—a conclusion which would be in accordance with the richness of the food sources in the region, especially the gulf waters and foreshores. They also suggest that a significant decline set in around the 182os, caused by wartime casualties, deportation and out-migration. Introduced diseases too probably played their part; the region is among those coastal zones where early 'disease episodes' were recorded (Pool, p. 45 Figure 3.1). It is likely that William Williams' estimate of 1838 (4,800) reflects a substantial decline from the population of the pre-contact period, to some extent offset by the return of the Hauraki refugees after the strife with their Ngati Haua hosts.

The Fenton survey 1857

2.8 This survey (Statistics of New Zealand, 1857, and also published as Observations on the state of the aboriginal inhabitants of New Zealand, 1859) for which F.D. Fenton

i6