Why wasn't the Treaty of Waitangi framed in terms of a feudal exchange, rather than a surrender of sovereignty?

Upvote:2

I doubt that there was comprehensive intent from the UK side to be actually bound by the treaty. As such, having substantial difference between the English and the Maori version is not a bug, but rather a feature. I am not necessarily assuming duplicity of each individual Brit involved with drafting and signing the treaty, merely on the overall system level.

Treaties signed between colonial powers and non-European-(decendent) groups, which are later interpreted differently by the colonial power than by the treaty partner, and either ignored or used as a pretex for an extension of colonial rule are a recurring feature of colonialism. Conversely, I cannot think of any treaty in such a sitution which was not signed under duress and actually adhered to.

More post

Search Posts

Related post