Talk:Iwi

message: The article was kind of contradictory. On the one hand it asserted (wrongly) that in pre-European times iwi = nation, and while it may be true that to some extent today iwi might at times be thought of as a superlarge collection of tribes, I wonder how much it is true to call it the largest 'everyday social grouping' without mentioning that such 'groupings' are pretty much symbolic rather than practical most of the time. And, a look at the way the term iwi is used in the examples mentioned in the article shows that most of them have exactly the same sense as tribe, and if you interchanged the terms, the meaning wouldn't be changed. Probably needs more work Kahuroa 10:37, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Verifiable evidence provided for use of a 'nation'-based definition: I have amended the definition to reflect the existing reference used (Ballara) and undertook bibliographic research to find a further four sources which support this claim.  As indicated in her work, Ballara does use tribal terminology but is critical in its use.  Her preference is 'peoples' or 'nations' and uses the latter throughout the book as an pairing with 'tribes'.  There are countless alternate references available which equate 'iwi' with 'tribe(s)', and Ballara has shown their weaknesses. --Te Karere (talk) 08:58, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The translation used on Wikipedia should reflect a consensus in reliable/academic sources. If "countless references" translate iwi as "tribe(s)" (AFAIK most do), then Wikipedia needs to as well – or at the very least these translations should be mentioned together. Should Ballara's usage become more widespread, then our translation can be changed accordingly. But until then, we can't represent the preferences of one or a handful of historians as being "more correct", regardless of how well Ballara makes her point. – Liveste (talk • edits) 12:11, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

text: I agree with the idea of grouping the major "tribe" references together and can start with Best as he's the one Ballara references. I'll add on Richard Taylor and John White as the founding references - any others that use the term are generally referencing sources that are quoting from translations made by one these - and S. Percy Smith and Te Rangi Hiroa (Peter Buck) who complete the major ethnologists.  I think posing concepts as non-fixed entities (as is the case here, where the translation has changed across time) is a stronger position for Wikipedia than posing it as one thing.  Knowledge, particularly that which is socially-constructed like Wikipedia's, is continuously being contested.  Assuming a fixed definition risks obsolecence.  Your feedback has been very helpful. --Te Karere (talk) 20:34, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: My edits

message: Anyone who has read widely about "traditional" Maori life before say 1880,will be struck by how seldom ,if ever, the word iwi  appears at all, in any context. By far the most common unit mentioned is hapu. There is another really common unit that is talked about at length and that is the gathering of people, usually mainly adult men, from widely scattered areas, who come together for the purpose of war or to discuss or plan war. Often the men come huge distances and in a wide variety of size groupings. Sometimes they are close relatives, sometimes distant relatives sometimes they are united more by an obligation to the host group,sometimes by fear of a host group. Often the men appear to turn up more for the chance to take part in a war to increase their personal mana than because of a close "iwi" relationship. There does not appear to be a name, or at least a common name, for this time of grouping or alliance. Because this type of grouping was so common it was quite straight forward for the Kingitanga to put together an entirely new Pan Maori organization in the 1850's and 1860's. This type of grouping was far more commen than the more notional iwi.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.58.190.164 (talk) 21:04, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did "traditional" iwi actually fuction?