‘ … Arguably the Best General ‘

Some months ago I paid tribute to a Mangamuka (Hokianga) leader baptised by a missionary in the 1830s and given the name of Hohepa Otene honouring a prominent Wesleyan leader in New South Wales. That name appeared for some years on the list of Stations in and around Tai Tokerau. Then it appeared in the Waikato, and I mistakenly assumed that this was the same person - after a break.

 I have been reminded that there was another young Māori leader, Riwha Titokowaru baptised with that same name, but somewhat later in 1842, by John Skevington, then missionary in South Taranaki These two visited Auckland (on foot), in 1845, and when Skevington suddenly died as a result of his exertions, Riwha stayed on in that town for a while, improved his reading and writing skills, and made an impression on people like Walter Lawry and John Whiteley. I regret my confusion, but I am as a result now able to honour one of the more remarkable Māori leaders of mid-19th century Aotearoa. He is well-known - his entry in the NZ Dictionary of Biography is one of the lengthier ones - and the phrase used as the title above was coined by the well-known historian James Belich. I will largely use his words to summarize the life and the Wesleyan connections of this great leader.

Born near Okaiawa in South Taranaki Riwha was of the Ngati Manuhiakai hapu of Ngati Ruanui.  Through his family and their marriage connections, he was born to be a leader – his father Hori Kingi Titokowaru was a principal leader of Ngati Ruanui in the intertribal conflict with the Waikato. He also was baptised within the Wesleyan church - Riwha did not assume his father’s name until the latter died in 1848. Belich, with respect to Kiwha’s later status, suggests that his whole life was a ‘dialectic between race and war.’ In 1850 at a peacemaking meeting at Waitotara, his speech was ‘impeccably Christian.’

Then, for four years or so,  he moved away from pacifism and missionary Christianity to become a part of the Māori nationalist movement, opposed to land living and seeking to set up a Māori king. Later in that same decade, Riwha appears on the Stationing Sheet for the Methodist Church in Australasia – he is named a Māori Home Missionary. Belich makes no mention of this, and there is no record as far as this writer is aware of the reasoning behind the move. For a period of five or six years, his name appears, appointed to Mangatawhiri – part of the sprawling Manukau Circuit.

Belich conjectures that Riwha participated in some of the land struggles of that time in the Taranaki War of 1860-61, and it was that experience that gave rise to the judgment that is quoted in the title. On the other hand, there is this puzzling, printed record (referring to him as Hohepa Otene) acting, it might be assumed, on behalf of a missionary church.  Riwha had close knowledge of affairs in Waikato, and as mentioned, was a supporter of the King Movement. Why was he sent to that particular place? Mangatawhiri was regarded by the King Movement as its northern boundary – not to be transgressed by colonial troops.

What expectations were there of him in this position – whom did he serve? He had already made a name for himself, though not yet 40. He was a man of mana and it may have been hoped that he would exercise a pacifying role on the borderline between tangata whenua and colonial aspirations. At this time a change was taking place in the Māori response to Christianity – the Pai Marire movement‘s leader died and Riwha stepped into his role, though traditional Māori religion was much more important to Titokowaru. As he became more involved in the latter, his involvement in introduced Christianity declined.

It was the former emphasis that marked the great peace campaign that began in 1867. This involved finding ways to ‘placate‘ imperial troops, colonial government, and settlers while dealing with the hugely varied aspirations (especially concerning land) of tangata whenua. Peace meetings were widely held in Taranaki, but in the end, the impetus was lost and the confrontations resumed. That these went on as long as they did reflect Titokowaru’s ability to employ limited resources to the best effect.

The story of his later years is set against the background of confiscation and non-violent resistance. Titokowaru had now become a focus of attention, senior in some respects, to other tribal leaders such as Te Kooti, and Te Whiti at Partihaka.  They suffered each in their way – imprisonment not least. It was probably one such experience that led to his death in 1889 at his family home at Okaiawa., His tangi was attended by 2000 people. In the end, he left an extraordinary record  - one that still needs to be taken into account as the issues of the 19th century intrude on those of the 21st.