Abstract:
Attempts to explain the Mau in Western Samoa have generally examined it in isolation, thus throwing the emphasis onto the particularities of the New Zealand administration. Comparison has been limited to passing references intimating that the New Zealand administration was unusually incompetent and provocative. A closer comparison shows significant structural similarities between German, American and New Zealand regimes, but with the latter providing greater opportunities for Samoans in administration and development. Moreover, New Zealand officials expressed equal concern for welfare but greater confidence in Samoan capacity for development. The differences between the regimes were probably less significant in practical terms than has been assumed, and the resistance movements under each show a recurrence of certain themes, particularly the contributory role of part- and non-Samoans, and status rivalry between chiefs and lineages along traditional lines. Colonial resistance thus does not depend on colonial misgovernment so much as on a sense of indigenous identity, and the greater level of resistance in New Zealand Samoa reflects the greater opportunities for political expression.
