Full story: The Boyd incident - A frontier of chaos?
Article 1:
December 1809.
Long story short: European people assaulted a Māori chief. In response, the Māori got revenge by attacking the European ship’s captain. (Utu - balance, revenge)
- Te Pahi (a Māori man who had been with the Europeans to Australia to set up trade) came to stop the violence and rescue the European people. Sadly, the European people blamed Te Pahi and killed him, too.
What are your thoughts? What do you wonder?
Not that many thoughts, but it is sad how Te Pahi was blamed without any reason when he was with the Europeans trading.
Article 2:
How the Boyd (name of the ship) Incident used to be told:
The Boyd was attacked in 1809 by a Māori tribe. The ship captain and crew were violently attacked.
Travel advisory
For some Europeans, the Boyd incident put New Zealand in the ‘avoid if at all possible’ category. A pamphlet circulating in Europe warned sailors off the ‘Cannibal Isles’ - ‘touch not that cursed shore lest you these Cannibals pursue’.
How was the story different (what’s missing)? Why do you think it was told this way?
This story is told from the European’s perspective, whereas the story told earlier was told from both Māori and European perspectives. Also, Te Pahi was missing from the story.
I think the Europeans told this story, showing the negative about the Māori, making them the villains, and not telling the whole story. The European story didn’t tell that the Europeans first attacked them first, and shows that the Māori attacked them without any reason.
