Causalidad:

This  leads  to  the  final  category  of  taonga.  As  mentioned,  taonga  can  be  many  things  to   different  people  but  for  the  purposes  of  this  research  it  is  important  to  juxtapose  the   previous  two  types  discussed  with  a  third  more  traditional  iteration.  Writing  in  1998,   Paul  Tapsell  acknowledged  the  limited  array  of  sources  that  manage  to  encompass  an   approximate   understanding   of   what   may   or   may   not   constitute   a   taonga.   Citing   Sir  

Hugh   Kawharu’s   (1989)   explanatory   footnote   to  The   Treaty   of   Waitangi,   Tapsell   sets   forth  a  traditional  definition  from  the  perspective  of  his  iwi,  Te  Arawa.42    

More   than   simple   markers   of   ancestral   lands,   Tapsell   attributes   taonga   with   three   essential  elements,  Mana,  Tapu,  and  Korero.  Mana  (authority;  power;  prestige;  status),   being   instilled   by   the   ancestors   as   it   is   passed   from   one   generation   to   another,   the   greater  the  ancestors  associated  with  a  taonga,  the  greater  the  mana  (Tapsell,  1998,  p.   13;   Mead,   1990).   In   a   complementary   fashion,   to   maintain   the   mana   of   a   taonga,   it   must   be   treated   as  tapu  (protect;   sacred;   prohibited;   set   apart).   This   governs   the   appropriate   actions   when   interacting   with   taonga,   ensuring   that   its   sanctity   is   undiminished.   For   Tapsell,   korero   is   the   most   important   of   the   three   essential   elements.   It   can   include   ancestral   knowledge,   rituals   and   historical   stories   and   is   a   traditional  means  to  confer  lore  and  knowledge,  tying  a  specific  iwi  to  their  ancestors   and  ancestral  lands  (Tapsell,  1998,  pp.  14-­‐17).    

With  their  mauri  (life  essence;  life  force;  power  of  creation  from  the  gods)  protected  by   an   ancient   karakia   (recitation;   incantation;   highly   ritualised   prayer),   taonga   are   harbourers   of   ancestors’   wairua   (spirit;   essence   of   being;   soul)   and   are   often   acknowledged   as   living   entities   (Tapsell,   1998).   The   presence   of   taonga   during   a   life-­‐ crisis   is   central   to   their   importance   within   iwi.   Here,   taonga   are   performed,   breaking   down   the   temporal   barriers   that   separate   an   iwi   from   their   tūpuna   (ancestors),   whereby   ancestors   and   descendants   are   brought   together   into   “a   powerful,   singular   genealogical  identity”  (Tapsell,  1998,  p.  15).  The  ability  to  dissolve  temporal  distance  is   what  Salmond  elegantly  terms  the  “alchemy  of  taonga”  (1984,  p.  120).    

There   is   one   final   definition   of   taonga   that   be   must   raised.   A   number   of   Waitangi   Tribunal  claimants  have  challenged  what  the  term  taonga  actually  encapsulated  in  the   second  article  of  The  Treaty  of  Waitangi.43  _{But  perhaps  none  are  as  encompassing  or  as}  

42  _{‘Treasures’:  ‘taonga’.  As  submissions  to  the  Waitangi  Tribunal  concerning  the  Maori  language}  

have  made  clear,  ‘taonga’  refers  to  all  dimensions  of  a  tribal  group’s  estate,  material  and  non-­‐ material  –  heirlooms  and  wahi  tapu,  ancestral  lore  and  whakapapa,  etc.    

See,  Kawharu,  I.  H.  (Ed.).  (1989).  Waitangi:  Māori  and  Pākehā  perspectives  of  the  Treaty  of   Waitangi.  Auckland,  New  Zealand:  Oxford  University  Press,  p.  320.  

43  _{See,  New  Zealand.  Waitangi  Tribunal.  (1989a).  Report  of  the  Waitangi  Tribunal  on  the  Kaituna}  

River  claim  (Wai  4)  Waitangi  Tribunal  reports  (2nd  ed.).  Wellington,  New  Zealand:  Author.  New   Zealand.  Waitangi  Tribunal.  (1989c).  Report  of  the  Waitangi  Tribunal  on  the  te  reo  Maori  claim   (Wai  11)  Waitangi  Tribunal  report  (2nd  ed.).  Wellington,  New  Zealand:  Author.  And  New  

far  reaching  as  the  long  awaited  Ko  Aotearoa  Tēnei  (The  Waitangi  Tribunal,  hereafter   The  Tribunal,  2011),  commonly  referred  to  as  the  Wai  262  report.  Effectively  arguing   for   a  sui   generis   classification   when   dealing   with   anything   mātauranga   Māori,   any   products   of   mātauranga   Māori,   or   contribution   to   mātauranga   Māori,   the   report   questions,  “who  (if  anyone)  owns  or  controls  Māori  culture  and  identity  (The  Tribunal,   2011,   p.   17).44   In   examining   this   question,   the   Wai   262   report   defines   a   number   of   taonga  but  in  reference  to  this  research  it  is  their  identification  of  a  taonga  work  that  is   relevant,  

A  taonga  work  is  a  work,  whether  or  not  it  has  been  fixed,  that  is  in  its  entirety   an  expression  of  mātauranga  Māori;  it  will  relate  to  or  invoke  ancestral   connections  [whakapapa],  and  contain  or  reflect  traditional  narratives  or   stories  [korero].  A  taonga  work  will  possess  mauri  and  have  living  kaitiaki  in   accordance  with  tikanga  Māori.    

(The  Tribunal,  2011,  p.  54)    

There   has   been   some   debate   around   the   use   of   the   specific   terms   mentioned   (A.   Hakiwai,  personal  communication,  December  18,  2013).  Nonetheless,  it  is  the  opinion   of   this   researcher   that   this   definition   does   not   add   anything   further   to   the   other   examples   presented,   with  mātauranga,   whakapapa,   and  kaitiaki   (trustee,   custodian,   guardian),  inherent  within  Tapsell’s  traditional  taonga,  as  is  the  validation  of  the  both   old  and  new  embodiments.    

Interestingly,  within  the  cultural  sector  many  museum  curators  and  employees,  Māori   and  Pākehā  alike  have  assumed  the  kaitiaki  role  for  the  taonga  within  their  stores.  But   as  previously  noted,  many  of  those  objects  have  been  separated  from  their  korero  and   are   hence   unable   to   function   as   traditional   taonga   and   arguably   would   not   be   encapsulated   within   this   definition.   Nonetheless,   the   report   also   recognises   another   distinct   form   of   object   related   to  taonga   works,   which   are   categorised   as  taonga-­‐ derived  works.  

Zealand.  Waitangi  Tribunal.  (1989b).  Report  of  the  Waitangi  Tribunal  on  the  Manukau  claim   (Wai-­‐8)  Waitangi  Tribunal  report  (2nd  ed.).  Wellington,  New  Zealand:  Author.  

44  _{Sui  generis  is  Latin  for  “of  its  own  kind.”  In  legal  terms  it  is  used  to  describe  a  form  of  legal}  

protection  outside  typical  legal  protection,  indicating  that  it  is  something  unique  or  different.   For  an  earlier  precedent  see  Working  Group  on  Indigenous  Populations.  (1993).  Mataatua   declaration  on  cultural  and  intellectual  property  rights  of  Indigenous  Peoples.  Paper  presented   at  the  First  International  Conference  on  the  Cultural  and  Intellectual  Property  Rights  of   Indigenous  Peoples,  Whakatane,  New  Zealand.  Retrieved  from  

A  taonga-­‐derived  work  is  a  work  that  derives  its  inspiration  from  mātauranga   Māori  or  a  taonga  work,  but  does  not  relate  to  or  invoke  ancestral  connections,   nor  contain  or  reflect  traditional  narratives  or  stories,  in  any  direct  way.  A   taonga-­‐derived  work  is  identifiably  Māori  in  nature,  but  has  neither  mauri  nor   living  kaitiaki  in  accordance  with  tikanga  Maori.  

(The  Tribunal,  2011,  p.  54)    

This   is   not   to   suggest   that   these   works   are   not   important   in   their   own   right   or   are   incapable  of  having  their  own  stories  or  connections,  rather  that  these  objects  reflect   modern   times   and   connections,   not   ancient   ones.   And   in   this,   they   are   prescribed   lesser  recommendations  for  protective  governance  than  taonga  works.45