Uninhabited New Zealand

The settlement of Maori in new Zealand is quite recent.
What if Maori and other people never started a colony in new Zealand? could it possible that the islands remain completely uninhabited to this day?
The distance and the difficult of settlement in a unknown and uninhabited land was sufficient for avoid a large immigration in the islands? If islands remain mostly uninhabited, how the world considered this land? Terra Nullis? A giant natural reserve? A land for new settlement and natural resources?
 
This would mean that New Zealand's megafauna like the Moa and Haast's Eagle would still be around by the time the Europeans show up, rather than being hunted to extinction by the Maori IOTL. I can't imagine how European explorers would react to giant ostriches and eagles.
 
They'd react by shooting them.

But to the OP's question, no, they won't remain uninhabited. The British and others had too much experience running settler colonies or doing plantation agriculture or large scale commercial herding. Plus NZ has big chunks of temperate European friendly weather.

It's going to be settled.
 
They'd react by shooting them.

But to the OP's question, no, they won't remain uninhabited. The British and others had too much experience running settler colonies or doing plantation agriculture or large scale commercial herding. Plus NZ has big chunks of temperate European friendly weather.

It's going to be settled.
It'll be settled quicker than OTL. Great location for a Loyalist colony.
 
The British and others had too much experience running settler colonies or doing plantation agriculture or large scale commercial herding. Plus NZ has big chunks of temperate European friendly weather.

It's going to be settled.
It'll be settled quicker than OTL. Great location for a Loyalist colony.

Thats not quite accurate. IIRC New Zealand's Wool and Dairy Industries only really took off after the advent of refrigeration in the 1880s. Before then New Zealand's economy was more or less based on Gold, Kauri Gum and some other natural resources. Though yeah It is definitely going to be settled by somebody and probably a bit earlier than OTL.
 
Thats not quite accurate. IIRC New Zealand's Wool and Dairy Industries only really took off after the advent of refrigeration in the 1880s. Before then New Zealand's economy was more or less based on Gold, Kauri Gum and some other natural resources. Though yeah It is definitely going to be settled by somebody and probably a bit earlier than OTL.
New Zealand flax, whaling and supplying foodstuffs to the colonies in NSW. But why does that make our comments inaccurate?
 
New Zealand flax, whaling and supplying foodstuffs to the colonies in NSW. But why does that make our comments inaccurate?
Simply put because New Zealand's soil isn't actually all that good for Agriculture and aside from weird Victorian Pseudo Science its climate isn't particularly better for Europeans than lets say Australia. Along with that their is a chance that without the Maori New Zealand's colonisation may actually be slowed down a bit because while they did scare away immigrants what's less well known is that they actually weren't all that opposed to settling Pakeha on their land and in its early days trade with them was pretty much all that was keeping Auckland running.
 
Along with all of this Maori Colonisation of New Zealand is sometimes dated to before even the 10th century which makes the idea that their even would be a British or French colonial empire that would be trying to colonise at least to me feel a little bit farfetched
 
Along with all of this Maori Colonisation of New Zealand is sometimes dated to before even the 10th century which makes the idea that their even would be a British or French colonial empire that would be trying to colonise at least to me feel a little bit farfetched
What's the evidence for this early date?
 
Simply put because New Zealand's soil isn't actually all that good for Agriculture and aside from weird Victorian Pseudo Science its climate isn't particularly better for Europeans than lets say Australia. Along with that their is a chance that without the Maori New Zealand's colonisation may actually be slowed down a bit because while they did scare away immigrants what's less well known is that they actually weren't all that opposed to settling Pakeha on their land and in its early days trade with them was pretty much all that was keeping Auckland running.
Never did I mention agriculture.

Having lived in Canada, Australian and New Zealand, I can assure you NZ has the most hospitable climate.
 
Along with all of this Maori Colonisation of New Zealand is sometimes dated to before even the 10th century which makes the idea that their even would be a British or French colonial empire that would be trying to colonise at least to me feel a little bit farfetched
False. Maori settlement has now been dated to quite narrowly in the 1280-1400 CE range
 
The settlement of Maori in new Zealand is quite recent.
What if Maori and other people never started a colony in new Zealand? could it possible that the islands remain completely uninhabited to this day?
The distance and the difficult of settlement in a unknown and uninhabited land was sufficient for avoid a large immigration in the islands? If islands remain mostly uninhabited, how the world considered this land? Terra Nullis? A giant natural reserve? A land for new settlement and natural resources?
The native fauna is screwed hard once Europeans and thir invasive species roll up, since they don't even have Maori's to endure and thus be prepared if not be a bit more resillient.
 
If the island was uninhabited and settled by Europeans, then New Zealand's population would be almost 100% white instead of being a large majority ITTL.

Any influences from native Maori culture or history wouldn't exist for NZ, obviously, so it might up being a Britain 2.0 in terms of culture. I'd reckon the white inhabitants would also be extremely racist against any Asian or Polynesian that's trying to immigrate with a White Australia policy cranked up to 11 thanks to their isolation affording them to conduct such a harsh policy.

Large amounts of native animals would still become extinct due to hunting or invasive species like cats, rats, stoats, or sheep.
 
If Australia and New Zealand are both still settled by Britain, they would almost definitely part of the same Dominion, as one of the only reasons they weren't was the Maori rights that Australia would never respect.
 
Doesn't stop France and Guiana, Britain and all of their small islands, USA and Alaska and Hawaii, Denmark and Greenland etc
Alaska is way closer and you can drive there. And also the UK and USA are colonizing powers in these cases; NZ was offered to join Australian Federation and didnt. It wasnt because of Maori rights.
 
Alaska is way closer and you can drive there. And also the UK and USA are colonizing powers in these cases; NZ was offered to join Australian Federation and didnt. It wasnt because of Maori rights.
It was the chief reason, as Australia did not recognize their Aboriginals as people, did not give them the franchise until 1962.
 
It was the chief reason, as Australia did not recognize their Aboriginals as people, did not give them the franchise until 1962.
Citation needed.

New Zealand was originally governed as part of NSW until it was split off in 1841 (before Waitangi!) Because of distance.
 
Last edited:
Top