Talk:Hōne Heke

Untitled
I replaced the connection with Rahiri because it was significant contribution to his ability to influence other Maori tribes. ping 06:59, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

the treaty promised what, again?!?
This is POV: "Furthermore it became clear that the British considered the authority of the chiefs to be subservient to that of the Crown although the treaty promised equal partnership."

Yes, it was Hone Heke's POV. ping 07:57, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I have read many versions of the treaty in both Maori and English and nowhere does it refer to "partnership".This appears to be something that was invented by the Anglican church in the 1980s-90s?? (approx) as an act of contrition and from then began to appear in a variety of literature and web sites as a "fact".Then we have the judges deciding they can rewrite the treaty as a variety of very dubious "principles"which once again were more based on 1990s politics then the Treaty itself from what I have read and can deduce from the sources.Like his "conversion" to christianity ,HH seems to be very flexible in his point of view and or undertakings.Most likely he was an opportunistic warrior seeking to enhance his mana in any way possible.Claudia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.237.35.32 (talk) 06:54, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Imposition of Ceasefire
"...and negotiated a ceasefire, which they then imposed upon the British."

If a ceasefire is negotiated, then can it be "imposed" upon someone? Stephenjh (talk) 00:34, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Good point. I have reworded it according to the NZDB - seems like we got it garbled along the way somehow. The NZDB says: About a week after the withdrawal from Ruapekapeka, Heke, Kawiti and Nene met at the pa of the neutral chief Pomare II and agreed to seek peace. Nene was to act as intermediary between the resistance leaders and the government, and went to Auckland to tell the governor that they had made peace. Kahuroa (talk) 04:10, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

'infamous' battle
The account here of Ohaewai includes a story of torture of a captured British soldier. This is cited in Moon's book, although James Cowan described it as 'palpable nonsense'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huttoldboys (talk • contribs) 04:51, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Reason for removing section about torture??
One editor has removed a section that talks about torture.I believe this was well documented in this case. No real reason was given for the removal.This section reflects the sometimes brutal reality of war involving Maori in those days.As James Cowan died in 1943 he couldnt possibly have read Moon's book or have seen his references. July 2011. Claudia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.237.34.122 (talk) 08:19, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

The section should be removed. It refers to the battle at Ohaeawai, where Heke was not even present. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huttoldboys (talk • contribs) 00:33, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Translation of French letters from the vatican
Recently the University of Waikato has received about 2000 letters from the Vatican that relate to the activities of the early French Missionaries like Petit and Pompelier.French speaking Masters student Kate ? has made a start on translating these and they are very revealing about attitudes to the Maori and to the protestants in the North. So far the letters have revealed that the French felt very underesourced and undermanned compared to the British. They also show they envied the Protestant's concern for the well being of sailors at sea. The letters are long and often filled with minutae about religion which is less intesting than the observations about early NZ. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.237.39.161 (talk) 00:35, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

The letters described above may well provide important insights into the concerns and motivation of the early French Missionaries like Petit and Pompelier. However the Wikipedia reference for Hone Heke is not the place to discuss the relationship (and rivalry) between the CMS missionaries and the Roman Catholic missionaries under Bishop Pompelier. The following material, which I have removed, is an superficial interpretation of this relationship.

"The French, being relatively poorly supported by their mother church, worked and lived far more closely with Maori, especially in the Hokianga area, than most of the well off Church Missionary Society missionaries who had become big land owners. Pompelier ,who led the Catholic missionaries, had advised several of the leading catholic chiefs such as Rewa and Te Kemara to be very wary in signing the treaty so it is not surprising that they had spoken out against the treaty. Pompelier was intelligent enough to publically work with Henry Williams and it was he who had asked for the inclusion of the religious freedon article to be put in the treaty"

The French missionaries may have believed they were poorly supported - however a reading of the letter and journals of the CMS missionaries shows they used their own money to buy land, which they considered necessary because (a) they had large families; and (b) the Church Missionary Society did not provide old age pensions or support for the families missionaries. In contrast the French missionaries could expect to be supported in Roman Catholic institutions when their missionary days were over.

To refer to "religious freedon (sic) article to be put in the treaty" is to impose a late 20th century viewpoint of 'religious freedom' on the motivation of Bishop Pompelier. Was he interested in promoting freedom for all religions? or just ensuring that the Roman Catholic viewpoint was represented at the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi? Colenso's account of the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi gives, perhaps unintentionally, a description of the rivalry between the CMS missionaries and the Roman Catholic missionaries under Bishop Pompelier. (MozzazzoM (talk) 00:35, 20 December 2011 (UTC)) I think the added clause in the treaty is quite self explanatory really-reigious freedom for anyone .Clearly P wished to make clear that Maori could select the Religion of their choice.As he was RC he clearly hoped Maori would select RC.The CMS crowd obviously felt sure in their belief that most Maori, and settlers for that matter, would select the Protestant version. A thought -did this clause authorise Hau hauism and the Raised Hand religion ,as well as all the many other minor Maori spiritual cults? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.58.190.164 (talk) 09:09, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hōne Heke. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20130112165137/http://www.maoridictionary.co.nz/index.cfm?dictionaryKeywords=ngakau+mahaki&n=1&sp=1 to http://www.maoridictionary.co.nz/index.cfm?dictionaryKeywords=ngakau+mahaki&n=1&sp=1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:33, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

First to sign Treaty?
The article currently says "Conflicting reports survive as to when Heke signed the Treaty of Waitangi. He may have signed with the other chiefs on 6 February 1840". I'm not entirely clear on what the source for this is (I can't find it in the next citation, but admit that I've only had a cursory look at the moment: ).

The Treaty of Waitangi article says "Hōne Heke was the first of the Māori chiefs who signed that day". The citation is This also seems to be supported by other sources I'd regard as authoritative, e.g. his DNZB entry, NZ History.

Currently at work (on a tea break) so I'm intending to review the article and sources properly later, but also flagging on the talk page anyone else has differing views/information in the meantime. Chocmilk03 (talk) 21:51, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Photo of relief sculpture at Auckland High Court
@Prosperosity I notice you added a photo of the sculpture to the Auckland High Court article, but not here. I would think it should be quite appropriate here too? — HTGS (talk) 00:36, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I know that there are multiple chief sculptures on the court building - I wasn't 100% confident that this was of Heke. --Prosperosity (talk) 00:41, 5 February 2024 (UTC)