WI the Maori King Movement had intervened in Te Kooti and Titokuwaru's Wars?

The Maoris fought on for decades, and never seemed to give up. Arguably the toughest and bloodiest wars were towards the end of the Land Wars period, during Te Kooti and Titokuwaru's campaigns. Both leaders inflicted great losses and defeat upon the British. However, neither gained support or intervention from the King Movement, a powerful alliance of tribes. What if they had, and the Maoris had struck a decisive blow at the right time and the British began pulling out of New Zealand?
 
The Maoris fought on for decades, and never seemed to give up. Arguably the toughest and bloodiest wars were towards the end of the Land Wars period, during Te Kooti and Titokuwaru's campaigns. Both leaders inflicted great losses and defeat upon the British. However, neither gained support or intervention from the King Movement, a powerful alliance of tribes. What if they had, and the Maoris had struck a decisive blow at the right time and the British began pulling out of New Zealand?

I guess it depends on what you mean by pulling out of New Zealand. By the mid 1860s the South Island was totally controlled by British settlers, and had significant economic development, in part due to several Gold Rushes and agricultural / pastoral growth. I can't seem to find figures for the population, but I would suspect that the South Island would have had well over 100,000 Europeans by 1868, which would, combined with their economic and scientific development, allow them to support the North Island settlements even if the Empire wouldn't. By support I do not necessarily mean fight long wars though. But I am sure that the South Island Europeans would significantly stronger than any of the Iwi or coalitions in the North Island, and as such be valuable allies, and so be able to support a more gradual domination or conquest of the North Island.
 
This could be an interesting timeline, as it could result in the following:

1. An Australasia that includes the South Island, as a sort of uber Tasmania like state. The North Island remaining as some sort of largely Maori ruled protectorate
2. A S/N Rhodesia like scenario - where the South Island is a Settler ruled country, and the North Island is an odd mixture of European towns and Maori Iwi statelets, with the latter having some sort of weak national government. If this happened, then the current power balance would probably be in the favour of the South Island as it would be a unitary state whereas the North would be not be, unless some sort of internal coalition conquored or unified the island. Which begs the question as to how they could, when Britain couldn't
 
The idea of a New Zealand split essentially into a settler New Munster and Maori Aotearoa is a rather interesting one in my opinion. Presumably, the northern island, Maori-dominated protectorate would be rather like Fiji, only with Pakeha rather than Hindustanis forming the powerful, non-native group. New Munster, meanwhile, controlling the Chatham Islands, Stewart Island (New Leinster), and possibly Kermadec could be a stable settler colony in some respects more British than Great Britain itself.
 
The idea of a New Zealand split essentially into a settler New Munster and Maori Aotearoa is a rather interesting one in my opinion. Presumably, the northern island, Maori-dominated protectorate would be rather like Fiji, only with Pakeha rather than Hindustanis forming the powerful, non-native group. New Munster, meanwhile, controlling the Chatham Islands, Stewart Island (New Leinster), and possibly Kermadec could be a stable settler colony in some respects more British than Great Britain itself.


I think such an island would have joined up with Australia though - as without the N Island's population potential it is just not viable to stay separate. I would love to see how the North Island would turn out though, would the various Iwi/tribes/etc remain fragmented, or would they unite? How would the various European towns (Auckland, Wellington, Tauranga, New Plymouth etc) fit in with this?
 
I think such an island would have joined up with Australia though - as without the N Island's population potential it is just not viable to stay separate. I would love to see how the North Island would turn out though, would the various Iwi/tribes/etc remain fragmented, or would they unite? How would the various European towns (Auckland, Wellington, Tauranga, New Plymouth etc) fit in with this?

Suppose each European town on North Island was its own little city-state as the Maori gradually united.
 
I was thinking that Te Kooti and Titokuwaru would eventually pledge allegiance to the King Movement as well, further expanding the alliance. Eventually the Movement would more or less control the North Island, minus a few of the European towns along the coast. This would create interesting balance problems, especially considering that the South Islanders would not be willing to fight long grueling wars with the Maoris.
 
I may be many years out of the new zealand school system now, But i'm not sure this is too realistic. I'd wager that by this point, even if they are very fragmented, there are two many whites in the North Island to be so easily undone. Northland is under control as is the Waikato. New Zealand political figures were VERY adept at convincing London of the importance of supporting the cause of settlement. A british pull-out is simply not going to occur. With ongoing population collapse in Maori, ongoing british/irish immigration, the number of people already in Auckland, a decisive maori victory this late in the game is impossible. By the moment the british move into the waikato, maori independence is a dead cause.

By 1870, just after this period there are a quarter of a million whites in the country, most in the south island but I'd wager those in the north are already a majority there.

also, you're not supposed to say "Maoris" unless you're an old white person from Whangarei. It's just Maori.
 
Top