"'[K]upapa alliances became a significant part of the new Maori politics of the later 1860s."

"In 2014 calls came from some Mãori and Pakeha commentators for commemoration of those lost in the New Zealand Wars, at the same level as occurs for New Zealand's overseas wars. Those calls sought equal status with Anzac Day for a national day of remembrance for those lost in the New Zealand Wars. This is a well-merited suggestion. However, those making such calls must face up to a hard reality from history that is commonly not addressed, probably because of the difficulty it raises.

"The difficulty is that for such commemorations to be accurate and inclusive would require an informed and frank recognition of the differing Mãori positions throughout the New Zealand Wars. In turn that would require a recognition that casualties in battles involving Mãori-on-Maori conflicts in the earlier and later wars were often as heavy, or heavier, than in the battles involving Pakeha Imperial or colonial armies and Mãori. As this book shows, the list of such clashes between Mãori covers all the periods of war in New Zealand from 1845 to 1872. Casualties were suffered on many occasions by both Maori sides, solely at Mãori hands. ...

"'[K]upapa alliances became a significant part of the new Maori politics of the later 1860s. Their decisions and actions would always be their own, based on intricate calculations of the balance of power between the tribes, and on the best means to protect the land and its resources.' [Anderson, Binney, Harris (2014)] ...

"What is mostly lacking, [however], in the various forms of publication, is detailed analyses of why many Mäori throughout the whole course of the New Zealand Wars aligned with the Crown or settler Government in fighting against other Mãori. A voluminous post-1996 body of literature explores in more detail some motivating reasons specific to particular areas, iwi or periods of time, but there is no one detailed narrative as to the military endeavours of Mãori aligned on the side of the Crown or settler Government, or their motivations. ...

"Judith Binney['s] ... 'Redemption Songs: A Life of Te Kooti Arkirangi Te Turuki' ... [for example] rarely recognised the depth of resentment that Te Kooti's repeated attacks caused among other Mäori, and their extended whanaunga (blood relatives); and she did not seem to identify this as the major reason why he faced so many vengeful pursuers. ... The reaction of other Mãori to the threat Te Kooti posed demands recognition as a major motivating factor in the widespread Maori opposition in the field to him.

"Dr Monty Soutar's doctoral thesis on Rapata Wahawaha, published in 2000 ... [shows] the other side of the particular coin relating to Wahawaha - one of the pre-eminent figures of the last seven years of the wars. ...

"James Belich posed the issue well as long ago as 1996 in 'Making Peoples': 'In a kind of mirror of Pakeha evasions, the role of kupapa is also downplayed in Maori memories. 'Might-have-been history is a dangerous game, but it is very hard to see how the later wars could have been won without kupapa help...' ...

"For any commemoration of the losses in the New Zealand Wars to be historically accurate, then, the reality that the wars were not simply a two-sided Crown-Mãori conflict would need to be acknowledged. The wars involved three groupings - dissident Mãori; Pakeha forces (either British Imperial Army or, later on, settler Government military forces); and Maori who aligned with the Crown or the settler Government for a complex range of reasons. All three groupings suffered large losses fighting for their different beliefs.

"If the call for commemoration is for the purpose of unification of our nation, rather than to perpetuate past conflicts, then all who lost their lives in the New Zealand Wars are deserving of respect and commemoration."

~ Ron Crosby from his 2015 book Kupapa

"New Zealand lacks a national unifying myth"

 

"New Zealand lacks a national unifying myth that embodies the shared views of the country’s history and future. The loss of a common national story is central to many of News Zealand’s problems. Myths explain our history, chart a path to the future and help bind the country together.
    "Richard Slotkin, who has written extensively about the various mythologies underpinning the United States experience, suggests that ‘myths are the stories – true, untrue, half-true – that ... provide an otherwise loosely affiliated people with models of patriotic action.’ A more formal dictionary definition suggests that myths may be popular traditions embodying core social values* ...
    "There have been a number of what may be described as archetypal experiences in New Zealand history that could approach a 'mythological' status that reflect the embodiment of some of the values that underpin the national identity. ANZAC immediately comes to mind. Wartime activity and service brings a people together often because national survival is at stake.
    "Then there is the 'man alone' myth that underpins much of Jock Phillips writing, along with the Kiwi do-it-yourself 'number 8 wire' approach to problem solving. Sport tends to be a unifier but primarily a hysterical support for the All Blacks which rapidly diminishes if the team does anything but win. Sport is meant to demonstrate resilience in the fact of adversity but not, it would seem, on the part of the fans.
    "Historians are well positioned to invent and develop new national stories. ... But historians have not taken on the task of devising a coherent national mythology that can bring unity to a fractured nation. Instead, students are being taught radically different versions of the nation’s past. All this reflects not simply divergent opinions on specific issues, but disagreements about the fundamental character of our institutions and the purposes of our nation.
    "One myth which did possess a unifying feature but which has been badly eroded is the position of the Treaty of Waitangi. The treaty established a foundation for equal citizenship, one people with equal recognition under the law.
    "Hobson at the signing of the Treaty is reputed to have said 'He iwi tahi tatou – 'we are now one people.' ... The problem is that in many respects myths [like this one] contain a great deal of invention and not a lot of evidence. But Hobson’s Pledge, whether it was said or not, provides a solid background for a national identity and the foundation for a common purpose. We should be one people. We should acknowledge our differences but our shared objective should be a unity of purpose. And with that unity of purpose we can become ... a country with well-educated people, who enjoy the lifestyle their unique setting offers and the good health that goes with that ..." 

~ Thomas Cranmer from his post 'A Common Purpose and a National Mythology'

* Myths are not a lie, explains mythologist Joseph Campbell, and to call them that is a misunderstanding — 

"a very strong and narrow opinion of what a myth 'is.' Someone who, perhaps, has only been exposed to the negative use of the term as a phrase for something that is seen as a 'mistruth.' Something told with the intent to deceive, or from the vantage point of a naive or uneducated mind. For many, calling something a 'myth' is to associate it with a profound deception: a feeble or unsophisticated attempt to explain material reality before the advent of the scientific age. Some see the term as an equivalent to the more modern 'fake news.' 

    "The contemporary conception of myth as falsehood has led people to think of myths as fairytales (another complex story structure that is often dismissed as containing much less essential truth than they actually do).
    "But for Campbell, myth presents a version of the truth that is far more essential than that which can be gleaned from almanacs, censuses, and encyclopaedias, whose 'facts' are dependent on the experience of the field of time and are often outdated as soon as they are published."

Writer Robert A. Johnson sums it up, saying "Myths are a special kind of literature not written or created by a single individual, but produced by the imagination and experience of an entire age and culture, and can be seen as the distillation of the dreams and experiences of a whole culture." 

So neither unimportant nor trivial. And certainly not a lie.