Mysterious skull in New Zealand

[Gerald Tarrant]

Link From the Daily Mail

The discovery of a yellowing, cracked skull on a riverbank in New Zealand’s North Island had baffled scientists.

Their research has shown the skull belonged to a European woman who lived about 270 years ago – a century before the first known arrival of white settlers in the country.

Even an inquest into the woman’s death has failed to solve the mystery.

Coroner John Kershaw, sitting in the town of Masterton, 50 miles from Wellington, decided after hearing expert opinions at the inquest that the skull belonged to a European woman aged between 40 and 45.

‘This suggests that the deceased was alive somewhere in the South Wairarapa region (north-east of Wellington) in or about 1740,’ said Mr Kershaw.

Mr Kershaw said despite radiocarbon dating of the skull, historians had reported that the region was not settled by Europeans until after the New Zealand Company sent settlers to Wellington in 1840.

The skull was discovered in October 2004 by a local resident as he walked by the Ruamahunga River, south-east of the small town of Featherston.

Two Auckland forensic pathologists, Dr Rex Ferris and Dr Tim Koelmeyer, told the inquest that the skull was not Maori – the Polynesian people who were the first known inhabitants of New Zealand – and was almost certainly a European woman.

They said that conclusion could be drawn because of the study of the size of the skull, and comparison of specific parts of the skull, such as the cheekbones and jaw, with skulls of other races.

The woman’s identity and cause of death could not be ascertained, and a verdict that ‘death has occurred’ was recorded.

New Zealand was discovered by Dutch navigator Abel Tasman in December 1642, but he only journeyed along the west coast of the country and did not land anywhere in the North Island.

And the first two European women known to arrive in the country were Kathleen Hagerty and Charlotte Edgar, British convicts who escaped from New South Wales and arrived in New Zealand in 1806.

English explorer Captain James Cook visited the area in 1770 - but that was nearly 30 years after the mystery woman was alive in the area.

Local archivest Gareth Winter told the coroner: 'There were no European inhabitants in the area 300 years ago.

'There are no records of a ship missing in New Zealand waters during this period, which might have resulted in somebody being stranded there.'

In the meantime the skull will be kept in the Wairarapa Museum of Art and History until further research can come up with some possible answers.

What are your guesses? [size=0]Aliens I think[/size] I was thinking that pirates/raiders might have been responsible. I have no idea how plausible it is, other than vague references to Malay and Indonesian pirates back in the day. Anyway it's an interesting mystery.

[Pelranius]

Could European also qualify as Mid Eastern? There is quite a connection between the Arabs and their co religionists in Southeast Asia.

[CaptainChewbacca]

I'm guessing white slave, personally.

[Patrick Degan]

If I had to make a quick guess, I'd say the woman fell off a ship and that's where the body eventually washed ashore.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

A Spanish or Portuguese Galleon surely could have landed in the vicinity, and they tended to permit women, usually prostitutes, aboard ships even on very long voyages. We don't know the full record of their voyages, and galleon traffic across the Pacific was heavy enough for a ship or two to be blown violently off course, and then the doldrums may have sent them south since the galleons were poor sailors and it might have proved impossible to tack back north through them. The Wairarapa coast is on the eastern side of the island, after all. The Solomon Islands were discovered by Alvaro de Mendaña in 1568, after all, and during his 1567 - 1568 expedition, the first penetration of the Southwest pacific by Europeans. On his later 1596 expedition, for example, the San Isabel (the Almiranta of the fleet), disappeared while approaching the Santa Cruz islands--if driven far to the south by contrary winds, that would in fact bring her along the east coast of northern New Zealand, roughly, though of course 100 years to early.

Nonetheless, I have to wonder if the woman was European, or half-European, half-Maori, the descendant of a shipwrecked sailor who landed along the coast and had a family. The voyage is however noteworthy because there were women and children aboard for the purpose of founding a colony in the Solomons. Wouldn't it be incredible if the San Isabel had touched land in New Zealand and a small group of Europeans had survived in Maori society for 140 years? Sadly, unlikely, but a Spanish or Portuguese origin remains most plausible, albeit from another voyage.

[Knife]

What are we calling European? There were trade routes to China as early as two thousand years ago. Doesn't take much to find a senaro in which a 'European' was shipped there.

[Big Phil]

Is there any reason the skull has to have been there since 1740? Perhaps it was brought over more recently, and either lost somehow, or deliberately placed there as a hoax.

[Patrick Degan]

Is there any reason the skull has to have been there since 1740? Perhaps it was brought over more recently, and either lost somehow, or deliberately placed there as a hoax.

Because there is no evidence for either alternative to the skull having been where it was found.

[Stuart Mackey]

If I had to make a quick guess, I'd say the woman fell off a ship and that's where the body eventually washed ashore.

Body would never have got up the river.

[Stuart Mackey]

snip Wouldn't it be incredible if the San Isabel had touched land in New Zealand and a small group of Europeans had survived in Maori society for 140 years? Sadly, unlikely, but a Spanish or Portuguese origin remains most plausible, albeit from another voyage.

I think this shipwrecked Spanish idea is plausible, but as for a small group of Europeans surviving within Maori tribes at the time? possibly, but I wouldn't like to bet on there longevity.

[Stuart Mackey]

Is there any reason the skull has to have been there since 1740? Perhaps it was brought over more recently, and either lost somehow, or deliberately placed there as a hoax.

Hoax is possible, because the stink it would cause would be hilarious.

[Stuart Mackey]

Is there any reason the skull has to have been there since 1740? Perhaps it was brought over more recently, and either lost somehow, or deliberately placed there as a hoax.

Because there is no evidence for either alternative to the skull having been where it was found.

If you only knew the local politics..

[Gerald Tarrant]

Is there any reason the skull has to have been there since 1740? Perhaps it was brought over more recently, and either lost somehow, or deliberately placed there as a hoax.

Hoax is possible, because the stink it would cause would be hilarious.

This wouldn't be a simple hoax to pull off as the skull is dated to a period when there weren't white people in that area. To properly pull this off I think you'd need the following.

• 1. Knowledge of local history of white exploration and settlement
  2. Carbon dating equipment.
  3. Access to a ~300 year old skull.
  4. Way to remove said skull without anyone finding out it's missing.

I think 1 isn't that hard, an amateur historian in the area would probably know that, and anyone who studied the South Pacific, or European expansion and colonialism would probably know the rough timeline.

Regarding 2: I don't know how widely carbon dating gear has proliferated, I've never used it, just had a lecture or two on it in history and biology (and physics, they were explaining decay rates and their uses). I don't even know what the equipment looks like, so I have no way of knowing how many people could do this.

The thing that makes me think a hoax is unlikely though is that 3 and 4 just seem so unlikely. I'd think most skulls that fit the description would be in graveyards, or archaeological sites or museum or something.

[Stuart Mackey]

Is there any reason the skull has to have been there since 1740? Perhaps it was brought over more recently, and either lost somehow, or deliberately placed there as a hoax.

Hoax is possible, because the stink it would cause would be hilarious.

This wouldn't be a simple hoax to pull off as the skull is dated to a period when there weren't white people in that area. To properly pull this off I think you'd need the following.

• 1. Knowledge of local history of white exploration and settlement
  2. Carbon dating equipment.
  3. Access to a ~300 year old skull.
  4. Way to remove said skull without anyone finding out it's missing.

I think 1 isn't that hard, an amateur historian in the area would probably know that, and anyone who studied the South Pacific, or European expansion and colonialism would probably know the rough timeline.

Regarding 2: I don't know how widely carbon dating gear has proliferated, I've never used it, just had a lecture or two on it in history and biology (and physics, they were explaining decay rates and their uses). I don't even know what the equipment looks like, so I have no way of knowing how many people could do this.

The thing that makes me think a hoax is unlikely though is that 3 and 4 just seem so unlikely. I'd think most skulls that fit the description would be in graveyards, or archaeological sites or museum or something.

Well I only said it was possible. It's doable if you know the right person here, the ethics of doing it are something else and the action is certainly criminal. In any event Marina's scenario is plausible, or a variation thereof.

[Big Phil]

3. Access to a ~300 year old skull.
4. Way to remove said skull without anyone finding out it's missing.

The thing that makes me think a hoax is unlikely though is that 3 and 4 just seem so unlikely. I'd think most skulls that fit the description would be in graveyards, or archaeological sites or museum or something.

Why are these so difficult? There are plenty of skeletons of Europeans in Europe - some are in museums, others in private collections, still others still in the ground (or in Churches).

Because there is no evidence for either alternative to the skull having been where it was found.

What evidence is there for her being alive in New Zealand at the time of her death? The article didn't indicate why they think she must have been in New Zealand and alive.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

snip Wouldn't it be incredible if the San Isabel had touched land in New Zealand and a small group of Europeans had survived in Maori society for 140 years? Sadly, unlikely, but a Spanish or Portuguese origin remains most plausible, albeit from another voyage.

I think this shipwrecked Spanish idea is plausible, but as for a small group of Europeans surviving within Maori tribes at the time? possibly, but I wouldn't like to bet on there longevity.

Yeah, the Maori would prove rather more resistant to a group of a few dozen Spaniards trying to conquer the entire island than most foes of the Conquistadors in the period proved to be. Since we know that if there were any surviving men they would of course, the moment they hit shore after months of starving to death at sea and horrifically sick, still form of pike ranks and try to demolish the nearest local idols, or statutes that looked like idols, while forcibly converting the natives to Catholicism.

Which I say with considerable sarcasm in the case of the Maori, who were more than capable of holding their own.

The most likely thing I say is that a few small number of survivors from a galleon in the 17th century came ashore, most of the crew having died when she was dismasted in a storm in the equatorials, http://www.learner.org/jnorth/images/gr ... sUSNOO.gif

As shown here, and under limited sail from rigged spars managed to make landfall after being carried in the currents for many weeks. Such things have happened--hell, a Japanese junk (several in fact) were carried from coastal Japanese waters to the Pacific with men alive onboard by ocean currents, and this is a considerably shorter distance through less stormy and more confined waters, if we assume the usual Galleon routes from Manila to Panama with the ship blown far to the south.

There would have either been a woman onboard, which is reasonable, and a couple male survivors, one of whom had a child by her who is this woman whose skull they've found, or perhaps they intermarried with the local Maori, being so outnumbered that the usual Spanish conquistador impulses were.. Impracticable.

I do have to imagine there is something beautiful about imagining a battered and weather-beaten High Galleon with the Almiranta's standard blowing hugely at her sternpost, hove-to with her gun ports open in a tranquil New Zealand bay while the Maori approach in their canoes, though. Someone should turn that into a painting.

[Gil Hamilton]

I do have to imagine there is something beautiful about imagining a battered and weather-beaten High Galleon with the Almiranta's standard blowing hugely at her sternpost, hove-to with her gun ports open in a tranquil New Zealand bay while the Maori approach in their canoes, though. Someone should turn that into a painting.

Find someone with experience in classic French Romantic school of painting (of the sort of Delacroix or Gericault) and I'm sure you've have a gorgeous work of art.

[Stuart Mackey]

What evidence is there for her being alive in New Zealand at the time of her death? The article didn't indicate why they think she must have been in New Zealand and alive.

Scull was found near Featherston (blink and you miss it)..that's inland, I doubt anyone was going to transport a corpse up the river and cetainly not overland given the bush at the time.
If she was shipwrecked, the Maori may have allowed them to live with them, its not impossible, or the women became slaves and the men eaten, and that's not impossible either.

[Stuart Mackey]

snip

There would have either been a woman onboard, which is reasonable, and a couple male survivors, one of whom had a child by her who is this woman whose skull they've found, or perhaps they intermarried with the local Maori, being so outnumbered that the usual Spanish conquistador impulses were.. Impracticable.

Quite possible, they might have become dinner too. Shame we will never know for certain.

I do have to imagine there is something beautiful about imagining a battered and weather-beaten High Galleon with the Almiranta's standard blowing hugely at her sternpost, hove-to with her gun ports open in a tranquil New Zealand bay while the Maori approach in their canoes, though. Someone should turn that into a painting.

It would be brilliant, the coast round there is wonderful.

[Patrick Ogaard]

If the skull isn't a hoax or the remains of some shipwreck survivor, there's always the possibility that it was part of a well-to-do naturalist's baggage. Many an intellectual gentleman of the mid to late 1800s would have had a study with a skull on a bookshelf or desk. Going on a long trip to the back end of nowhere, he might have taken the core elements of his library and study along, or he could have picked it up at some port of call along the way.

[Imperial Overlord]

There's a fair amount of individual variation in skull structure even among ethnic groups. For example, Native Americans tend to have different skull shapes than Europeans but a minority of Native Americans have European skull structure. With a sample size of one, it's hard to say much.