Chapter 117
Again, Captain Cook tells us that after a battle the victors used to collect all the dead that had fallen into their hands and bring them to the _morai_, where, with much ceremony, they dug a hole and buried all the bodies in it as so many offerings to the G.o.ds; but the skulls of the slain were never afterwards taken up. Their own great chiefs who fell in battle were treated in a different manner. Captain Cook was informed that the bodies of the late king and two chiefs, who were slain in battle, were brought to the _morai_ at Attahooroo. There the priests cut out the bowels of the corpses before the great altar, and the bodies were afterwards buried at three different spots in the great pile of stones which formed the most conspicuous feature of the _morai_. Common men who perished in the same battle were all buried in a single hole at the foot of the pile. The spots where the bodies of the king and chiefs reposed were pointed out to Captain Cook and his companions.[118]
[118] J. Cook, _Voyages_, vi. 40 _sq._
Again, in the island of Tahiti, the naturalist George Forster, who accompanied Captain Cook, saw a stone building, "in form of the frustum of a pyramid," constructed in terraces or steps, and measuring about twenty yards in length at the base. "This the native said was a burying-place and place of wors.h.i.+p, _marai_, and distinguished it by the name of _marai no-Aheatua_, the burying-place of Aheatua, the present king of Tiarroboo."[119]
[119] G. Forster, _Voyage round the World_, i. 267.
Again, in the island of Huahine, the missionaries Tyerman and Bennet saw "a pagan _marae_ hard by, where the sovereigns of Huahine were buried--and where, indeed, they lay in more than oriental state, each one resting in his bed, at the foot of the Sacred Mountain, beneath the umbrage of the magnificent _aoa_ [tree], and near the beach for ever washed by waters that roll round the world.... The great _marae_ itself was dedicated to Tani, the father of the G.o.ds here; but the whole ground adjacent was marked with the vestiges of smaller _maraes_--private places for wors.h.i.+p and family interment--while this was the capital of the island and the headquarters of royalty and idolatry."[120] A little later, speaking of the same sacred place, the missionaries observe, "The first _marae_ that we visited was the sepulchral one of the kings of Huahine, for many generations. It was an oblong inclosure, forty-five feet long by twenty broad, fenced with a strong stone wall. Here the bodies of the deceased, according to the manner of the country, being bound up, with the arms doubled to their shoulders, the legs bent under their thighs and both forced upwards against the abdomen, were let down, without coffins, into a hole prepared for their reception, and just deep enough to allow the earth to cover their heads."[121]
[120] D. Tyerman and G. Bennet, _op. cit._ i. 271.
[121] D. Tyerman and G. Bennet, _op. cit._ i. 280.
One of our best authorities on these islands, William Ellis, speaks of the _maraes_ (_morais_), whether they belonged to private families, to districts, or to the kings, as being "the general depositories of the bones of the departed, whose bodies had been embalmed"; and as a motive for the practice he alleges the sanct.i.ty which attached to these places, and which might naturally be supposed to guard the graves against impious and malicious violation.[122] However, the first missionaries say of the islanders that "they bury none in the _morai_, but those offered in sacrifice, or slain in battle, or the children of chiefs which have been strangled at the birth--an act of atrocious inhumanity too common."[123] According to Moerenhout, the _marais_ (_morais_) belonging to private families were often used as cemeteries; but in the public _marais_ none but the human victims, and sometimes the priests, were interred.[124] Thus there is to some extent a conflict of testimony between our authorities on the subject of burial in the temples. But the evidence which I have adduced seems to render it probable that many at least of the _morais_ served as burial-grounds for kings and chiefs of high degree, and even for common men who had fallen fighting in the service of their country.
[122] W. Ellis, _op. cit._ i. 405. See above, pp. 117 _sq._
[123] J. Wilson, _op. cit._ p. 364.
[124] J. A. Moerenhout, _op. cit._ i. 470.
In more recent years the German traveller, Arthur Baessler, who examined and described the existing ruins of these sacred edifices, denied that the _maraes_ (_morais_) were places of burial, while he allowed that they were places of wors.h.i.+p.[125] He distinguished a _marae_ from an _ahu_, admitting at the same time that they closely resembled each other, both in their structure and in the ritual celebrated at them.[126] According to him, a _marae_ was a sort of domestic chapel, the possession of which const.i.tuted the most distinctive mark of a n.o.ble family. Every chief, high or low, had one of them and took rank according to its antiquity.[127] It was an oblong area, open to the sky and enclosed by walls on three sides and by a pyramid on the fourth: walls and pyramid alike were built of blocks of stone or coral.[128] The _ahu_, on the other hand, was a monument erected to the memory of a distinguished chief, whose mortal remains were deposited in it. But apart from the grave which it contained, the _ahu_, according to Baessler, hardly differed from a _marae_, though it was mostly larger: it was a great walled enclosure with a pyramid, altars, and houses of the priests. And the ritual celebrated in the _ahu_ resembled the ritual performed in the _marae_: there, too, the faithful a.s.sembled to pray, and there the priests recited the same liturgy.[129] Thus both the form and, to some extent at least, the function of the two types of sanctuary presented a close similarity. The islanders themselves, it appears, do not always clearly distinguish them at the present day.[130] And the single distinction on which Baessler insisted, that the dead were buried in the _ahu_ but not in the _marae_, seems not to hold good universally, even on Baessler's own showing. For he admits that, "if ever a chief was buried in his own _marae_, it must have been in most exceptional cases, but probably statements to that effect rest only on a confusion of the _marae_ with the _ahu_; such a practice would also run counter to the habits of the natives, who sought the most secret places for their dead, and certainly concealed the heads in caves difficult of access and unknown to others. On the other hand, the _maraes_ of humbler families may more frequently, if not as a rule, have served as places of burial."[131] And even in regard to the holiest _marae_, dedicated to the great G.o.d Oro, in the island of Raiatea,[132] Baessler himself cites a tradition, apparently well authenticated, that a great number of warriors slain in battle were buried in it.[133] The argument that the people buried their dead, or at all events their skulls, only in remote caves among the mountains seems untenable; for according to the evidence of earlier writers the practice of concealing the bones or the skulls of the dead in caves was generally, if not always, a precaution adopted in time of war, to prevent these sacred relics from falling into the hands of invaders; the regular custom seems to have been to bury the bones in or near the _marae_ and to keep the skulls either there or in the house.[134] On the whole, then, it is perhaps safer to follow earlier and, from the nature of the case, better-informed writers in neglecting the distinction which
[125] A. Baessler, _Neue Sudsee-Bilder_, pp. 116 _sq._, 127 _sq._, 144 _sq._
[126] A. Baessler, _op. cit._ pp. 130, 131.
[127] A. Baessler, _op. cit._ p. 119.
[128] A. Baessler, _op. cit._ pp. 117 _sq._
[129] A. Baessler, _op. cit._ pp. 130 _sq._
[130] A. Baessler, _op. cit._ p. 140.
[131] A. Baessler, _op. cit._ p. 127.
[132] A. Baessler, _op. cit._ pp. 124, 141.
[133] A. Baessler, _op. cit._ pp. 127 _sq._, 144 _sq._
[134] See below, p. 311.
[135] Ellis says, "I am not aware that they rendered divine homage either to the sun or moon" (_Polynesian Researches_, iii.
171). Speaking of the Areois, Moerenhout says that "it seems to me clear that though they did not adore directly the sun and the other stars, nevertheless their wors.h.i.+p was little else than sabeism or the adoration of the visible and animated universe"
(_op. cit._ i. 503). He interpreted both Oro and Maui or Mahoui (as he spells the name) as the sun-G.o.d (_op. cit._ i. 484, 502, 503, 560 _sq._); but these interpretations appear to be his own guesses, unsupported by any statement of the natives. Maui was the great Polynesian hero, one of whose most famous exploits was catching the sun in a snare and compelling him to move more slowly (E. Tregear, _Maori-Polynesian Comparative Dictionary_, pp. 234 _sqq._, _s.v._ "Maui"; see above, p. 275); but this story, far from favouring the identification of Maui with the sun, seems fatal to it. According to J. R. Forster, the great G.o.d Taroa (Taaroa) was thought to have created the sun and to dwell in it (_Observations_, p. 540); but even if this statement is correct, it hardly implies a wors.h.i.+p of the sun. With regard to the moon, the same writer tells us (_l.c._) that it was supposed to be procreated by a G.o.ddess named O-Heena, "who presides in the black cloud which appears in this luminary"; and the statement is repeated by his son, George Forster, who adds: "The women sing a short couplet, which seems to be an act of adoration paid to that divinity [O-Heena], perhaps because they suppose her to have some influence upon their physical [oe]conomy.... 'The cloud within the moon, that cloud I love'"
(_Voyage round the World_, ii. 152). This so far seems to imply a reverence for the moon; and there are some grounds for thinking that O-Heena or Hina (as the name is usually spelt) was in Eastern Polynesia a moon-G.o.ddess. See above, p. 267, note^2.
[136] W. Ellis, _op. cit._ i. 331 _sq._, iii. 171. According to another account, the sun and moon in eclipse were supposed to be in the act of copulation. See J. Wilson, _op. cit._ p. 346.
Temples such as have been described were erected on all important occasions, such as a war, a decisive victory, or the installation of a great chief or king of a whole island. In these latter cases the natives boasted that the number of persons present was so great that, if each of them only brought a single stone, the amount of stones thus collected would have sufficed to build their largest temples and pyramids.[137]
One of the occasions when it became necessary to build new temples was when the old ones had been overthrown by enemies in war. After such a desecration it was customary to perform a ceremony for the purpose of purifying the land from the defilement which it had incurred through the devastations of the foe, who had, perhaps, demolished the temples, destroyed or mutilated the idols, and burned with fire the curiously carved pieces of wood which marked the sacred places of interment and represented the spirits of the dead (_tiis_). Before the rite of purification was performed the temples were rebuilt, new altars reared, new images placed within the sacred precincts, and new wooden effigies set up near the graves. At the close of the rites in the new temples, the wors.h.i.+ppers repaired to the seash.o.r.e, where the chief priest offered a short prayer and the people dragged a net of coco-nut leaves through a shallow part of the sea, usually detaching small pieces of coral, which they brought ash.o.r.e. These were called fish and were delivered to the priest, who conveyed them to the temple and deposited them on the altar, offering at the same time a prayer to induce the G.o.ds to cleanse the land from pollution, that it might be as pure as the coral fresh from the sea. It was now thought safe to abide on the soil and to eat of its produce, whereas if the ceremony had not been performed, death would have been, in the opinion of the people, the consequence of partaking of fruits grown on the defiled land.[138]
[137] J. A. Moerenhout, _op. cit._ i. 468.
[138] W. Ellis, _op. cit._ i. 348 _sq._
The temples were sacred. When a man approached one of them to wors.h.i.+p or to bring his offering to the altar, he bared his body to the waist in sign of reverence and humility.[139] Women in general might not enter a temple, but when their presence was indispensable for certain ceremonies, the ground was covered with cloth, on which they walked, lest they should defile the holy place with their feet.[140] For example, some six weeks or two months after the birth of a child the father and mother took the child to a temple, where they both offered their blood to the G.o.ds by cutting their heads with shark's teeth and allowing the blood to drip on leaves, which they laid on the altar. On this occasion the husband spread a cloth on the floor of the temple for his wife to tread upon, for she might not step on the ground or the pavement.[141] Similarly at marriage bride and bridegroom visited the family temple (_marae_, _morai_), where the skulls of their ancestors were brought out and placed before them; but a large white cloth had to be spread out on the pavement for the bride to walk upon. Sometimes at these marriage rites the female relatives cut their faces and brows with shark's teeth, caught the flowing blood on cloth, and deposited the cloth, sprinkled with the mingled blood of the mothers of the married pair, at the feet of the bride.[142] At other times the mother of the bride gashed her own person cruelly with a shark's tooth, and having filled a coco-nut basin with the blood which flowed from her wounds, she presented it to the bridegroom, who immediately threw it from him.[143]
While certain festivals were being celebrated at the temples the exclusion of women from them was still more rigid. Thus in the island of Huahine, during the celebration of the great annual festival, at which all the idols of the island were brought from their various shrines to the princ.i.p.al temple to be clothed with new dresses and ornaments, no woman was allowed to approach any of the sacred edifices under pain of death, which was instantly inflicted by whoever witnessed the sacrilege.
Even if the wives and children of the priests themselves came within a certain distance, while some particular services were going on, they were murdered on the spot by their husbands and fathers with the utmost ferocity.[144]
[139] J. Cook, _Voyages_, i. 224; J. R. Forster, _Observations made during a Voyage round the World_, p. 547; J. A. Moerenhout, _op. cit._ i. 469. Elsewhere (vi. 149) Captain Cook mentions that the baring of the body on the approach to a temple was especially inc.u.mbent on women, who otherwise had to make a considerable circuit to avoid the sacred edifice.
[140] J. A. Moerenhout, _op. cit._ i. 469 _sq._; A. Baessler, _Neue Sudsee-Bilder_, pp. 126 _sq._
[141] J. A. Moerenhout, _op. cit._ i. 536 _sq._
[142] W. Ellis, _op. cit._ i. 271 _sq._
[143] D. Tyerman and G. Bennet, _op. cit._ i. 558.
[144] D. Tyerman and G. Bennet, _op. cit._ i. 267 _sq._
Some of these sacred edifices are still impressive in their ruins and deserve the name of megalithic monuments. Thus the temple (_marae_, _morai_) of Oro at Opoa, which was the holiest temple in the island of Raiatea and perhaps in the Society Islands generally,[145] is about a hundred and thirty-eight feet long by twenty-six feet broad. It is enclosed by a wall of gigantic coral blocks standing side by side to a height of about six feet seven inches. The blocks have been hewn from the inner reef; the outer surfaces were smoothed, the inner left rough.
One of the blocks stands over eleven feet high, without reckoning the part concealed by the soil; it is twelve feet wide, by two and a half feet thick. Another block is about ten feet long by eight feet broad and one foot thick.[146] In the ruined temple of Tainuu, situated in the district of Tevaitoa, one block is about eleven and a half feet high by eleven feet wide, with a thickness varying from twenty inches to two and a half feet.[147]
[145] A. Baessler, _Neue Sudsee-Bilder_, pp. 124, 141; D.
Tyerman and G. Bennet, _op. cit._ i. 529 _sq._
[146] A. Baessler, _op. cit._ p. 142.
[147] A. Baessler, _op. cit._ p. 146.
The idols or images of the G.o.ds were usually made of wood, but sometimes of stone. Some were rudely carved in human shape; others were rough unpolished logs, wrapped in many folds of cloth or covered with a matting of coco-nut fibre.[148] The image of the G.o.d Oro was a straight log of casuarina wood, six feet long, uncarved, but decorated with feathers. On the other hand Taaroa, the supreme deity of Polynesia, was represented by a rudely carved human figure about four feet high, with a number of little images studding his body to indicate the mult.i.tude of G.o.ds that had proceeded from him as creator. The body of the G.o.d was hollow, and when it was taken from the temple, where it had been wors.h.i.+pped for many generations, it was found to contain a number of small idols in the cavity. It is supposed that these petty G.o.ds had been placed there by their wors.h.i.+ppers and owners that they might absorb some of the supernatural powers of the greater divinity before being removed to the places where they were to commence deities on their own account.[149] With a similar intention it was customary to fill the inside of the hollow images with red feathers in order that the plumes might be impregnated with the divine influence and might afterwards diffuse it for the benefit of the owner of the feathers, who had placed them in the image for that purpose. The red feathers, plucked from a small bird which is found in many of the islands, thus became an ordinary medium for communicating and extending supernatural powers, not only in the Society Islands, but throughout Polynesia. The beautiful long tail-feathers of the tropic or man-of-war bird were used for the same purpose. The G.o.ds were supposed to be very fond of these feathers and ready to impart their blessed essence to them. Hence people brought the feathers to the priest and received from him in exchange two or three which had been sanctified in the stomach of the deity; on extracting them from that receptacle, the priest prayed to the G.o.d that he would continue to inhabit the red feathers even when they were detached from his divine person.[150] The feathers thus consecrated were themselves regarded as in some sense divine and were called G.o.ds (_atuas_, _oromatuas_); the people had great confidence in their sovereign virtue, and on occasions of danger they sought them out, believing that the mere presence of the feathers would afford them adequate protection. For example, when they were threatened by a storm at sea, they would hold out the feathers to the menacing clouds and command them to depart.[151]
[148] W. Ellis, _op. cit._ i. 337 _sq._; J. A. Moerenhout, _op.
cit._ i. 471. According to Ellis, the wooden images were made from the durable timber of the _aito_ or casuarina tree, and the stone images were mostly rude uncarved angular columns of basalt, of various sizes, though some were of calcareous or siliceous stone. Some stone images, however, were rudely carved in human form. See A. Baessler, _Neue Sudsee-Bilder_, pp. 128 _sq._
[149] W. Ellis, _op. cit._ i. 354.
[150] W. Ellis, _op. cit._ i. 338 _sq._; J. A. Moerenhout, _op.
cit._ i. 471 _sqq._
[151] J. A. Moerenhout, _op. cit._ i. 473 _sq._
-- 5. _The Sacrifices, Priests, and Sacred Recorders_
The offerings presented to the G.o.ds included every kind of valuable property, such as birds, fish, beasts, the fruits of the earth and the choicest native manufactures. The fruits and other eatables were generally, but not always, dressed. Portions of the fowls, pigs, or fish, cooked with sacred fire in the temple, were presented to the deity; the remainder furnished a banquet for the priests and other sacred persons, who were privileged to eat of the sacrifices. The portions appropriated to the G.o.ds were placed on the altar and left there till they decayed. In the public temples the great altars were wooden stages, some eight or ten feet high, supported on a number of wooden posts, which were sometimes curiously carved and polished. But there were also smaller altars in the temples; some of them were like round tables, resting on a single post. Domestic altars and such as were erected near the bodies of dead friends were small square structures of wicker-work. In sacrificing pigs they were very anxious not to break a bone or disfigure the animal. Hence they used to strangle the animal or bleed it to death.[152]