Images of Old Hawaiʻi

by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Public Baths

In the late-19th Century, Waikīkī’s shoreline was mostly a day-use beach; overnight accommodations were scarce.  Visitors, usually residents of Honolulu, would arrive via horse-drawn carriage, on horseback or in a canoe.  (White)

“The most popular resort of the people of Oʻahu is the famous Waikīkī … Waikīkī is the seaside and pleasure-resort of the island. … There are a number of private residences, picturesque-looking bungalows and cottages, but all airy, comfortable, and close to the murmuring sea. A beautiful grove of towering coconut-trees adds to the tropical charm of the place.”  (Musick, 1898)

“The sea bathing is simply perfection. The water is never chilly; and yet it is most healthful and invigorating. The bottom is of nice smooth sand, always warm and pleasant to the feet. There is no fear of undertow or of any finny monsters. Not only is it pleasant to bathe here during the day, but moonlight bathing is indulged in. … It is a novelty, worth seeing, if not worth trying.  (Whitney, 1895)

Just as “sea bathing” were gaining popularity on the American and European continents, private bathhouses, like the Long Branch Baths, Ilaniwai Baths and Wright’s Villa, began to appear in Waikīkī.  (White)

Bathhouses began to appear along Waikiki Beach during the last quarter of the 19th Century. As early as the 1870s, for example, the Hawaiian Hotel “provided a cottage on the sea-shore at Waikiki, some three miles distant, where guests can . . . enjoy a morning or evening bath in the ocean.”

During the early ’90s, beachgoers patronized the Long Branch Baths with its “comfortable dressing rooms, fresh water douches, etc.” and the Waikiki Villa’s “commodious bath house” with “fresh water shower baths.” *Schmidt

“Bath-houses that equal those in Long Branch (New Jersey) are found here, and sea-bathing in January is as pleasant as in July. There is no clearer water, no finer beach, no smoother bottom in any of the many famous watering-places than are found at Waikīkī.”  (Musick, 1898)

Bathhouses served customers with bathing suits and towel rentals, dressing rooms and each access to the beach.  Initially, bathhouses served only day-use recreation of visitors, but eventually some of them began to offer overnight rooms.

The creation of the Public Baths alongside the aquarium in 1907 made it so there was a public beach for the first time in the park’s history.  (Reynolds)

An August 1907 news report stated, “The public bath house at the beach will be finished inside of the next two weeks. There are other conveniences aside from the large number of dressing rooms.  There is a large lounging room for ladles and their families, and a large dancing pavilion will soon be completed.”

In the men’s department there are thirty-five large dressing-rooms and six showers, In the ladles department there are accommodations for twenty bathers, with shower.” (Evening Bulletin, August 10, 1907) The City-owned public bathhouse was near Queen’s Surf Beach, in Kapiolani Park.

“When the moon become full Honolulu will see the opening of its first public dance pavilion. The building at the Kapiolani park bath-house has been put in shape for such dances … The Hawaiian band will be present to blow and beat the music for dancing.” (Star Bulletin, Dec 5, 1913)

“Twenty-five cents is the charge for use of a suit.  No charge is made to those who bring their own suits and use the lockers. The money taken is dropped in a box at the bath house window”. (Honolulu Advertiser, Sep 20, 1924)

Then City officials were urging the construction of “a better bathing house . . . more attractive and sanitary.” Subsequently denounced as “unsanitary” and “an eye-sore to the community for many years.” (Schmidt)

In 1930, “Plans for the new public building to be constructed soon … on the site of the present frame structure next to the memorial natatorium, will be completed within the next two weeks … The new bath house will be a long, narrow, one-story structure paralleling Kalakaua Ave.”

“The main room will be a large lounge, 96 feet long facing the sea and opening onto a stretch of turf through several tall archways. … On either side of the main lounge, which will be furnished with comfortable chairs and tables, will be situated the ample locker rooms …”

“… the men’s dressing quarters will be fitted with 280 lockers and nine showers. The women’s dressing room will contain 128 lockers, 52 dressing booths and seven showers.” (Star Bulletin, Jan 7, 1930)

In 1957 the Park Board changed the name of the Kapiolani Public Baths (aka Waikiki Public Baths) to the Kapiolani Beach Center. (Advertiser, Nov 5, 1957)

© 2024 Ho‘okuleana LLC

by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

The Land Between

What does that mean?

It’s the uses between “urban” and “agriculture” – it’s not really urban and it’s not really agriculture.  It’s between the two and has the kind of land uses that share characteristics of each.

And, it’s generally what folks on the neighbor islands and parts of O‘ahu call their hometown areas.

For most places on the neighbor islands and many parts of Oʻahu we call this land use “Country” or “Rural” – it’s how the residents describe their communities and neighborhoods.  But it is a lost land use.

Here’s the math: out of over 4-million acres of land in the State, only 11,602-acres (less than 1/3 of 1% of the total land area) is “Rural.”

“Urban” has only 198,600 acres (less than 5% of the total;) and the balance is split pretty evenly between Agricultural (47%) and Conservation (48%) (about 1.9-million acres, each.)

Why is so much of the state considered by its residents as “rural” or “country,” but State planning has so little land area designated as such?

We are living with a land use regulatory process that was written and mapped 50-years ago.  Times have changed, yet the required updates to the mapping and associated regulations have not kept up with the times.

While the communities and Counties are more aware, sophisticated and up-to-date with their regional and locational planning, the State continues to look at land use with half-century old eyes.

Let’s correct this and call this regional land use what the people call it – Rural (Better yet, what about “Country?”) – and , let’s also update and improve on “Rural” use standards.

Uses in the Rural district cannot simply and only be ½-acre minimum lot size home-site development projects (as they are limited to, today.)

Rural communities are “communities.”

There are community centers, houses, stores, schools and parks – where there are places where people interact, live, work, learn and play.  They are not simply home-sites.

The Rural Land Use Designation does not presently permit these small town and diverse uses … it should.

Many Rural communities, whether primarily Ag-based or simply “country,” don’t want urban design standards – they want characteristics that reflect their relaxed lifestyle.

We need to amend the State planning maps to accurately reflect these uses, broaden the uses permitted in the Rural district and finally define what has been and is actually happening.

Again, let’s not let Honolulu bias impose upon or dictate to others.

Honolulu urban design standards are not the be all and end all across the state.

I remember when Waimea on the Big Island got its first traffic signal in the middle of town.  For a few years, cowboys and others on horseback going through town would lean down and press the “walk” button to cross the street.

They are gone now, because the grass shoulders have been taken over by curbs, gutters and sidewalks – not very friendly to rural lifestyles.

For some reason, the initial land use mapping and permitted uses of the early 1960s left out Rural – even though that’s what a lot of people called their lifestyle.

It’s time to correctly map and expand our land uses (even rethink the need to have the State tell the neighbor island communities how they should look) … that means a generous amount of land should be in the “Rural” district with uses that fit the rural/country lifestyle – for now and into the future.

The image shows a friendly reminder of how life once was in Waimea on the Big Island.

© 2024 Hoʻokuleana LLC

by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Temperance?

“There were about two hundred and sixty foreigners [in the late-1820s to early-1830s] at Honolulu (some intelligent and respectable), most of whom claimed the privilege either of making, vending, or consuming the deleterious beverage, who, under the mal-administration of the Bokis, had enjoyed it too much to their liking …”

“… while many a sailor boy, beset by land sharks, far from friends and home, parted with his money, clothes, reputation, and peace, at a dear rate, at the yawning, pestiferous rum holes in Honolulu.”

“Had the proprietors been indulged to the extent of their wishes, they would have had not only successive crews from sea, but the people of the land, and foreign residents, pay them a large profit for supplying the perpetual means of excitement, drunkenness, confusion, and ruin.”

“Kaahumanu, Kuakini, Hoapili, Kaikioewa, Naihe, and Kinau, who took a noble stand against this terrible enemy, deserved the thanks of ship-owners, and of the world, instead of the sneers and curses of the vile, and the strenuous opposition of the proud and hardened abettors of the traffic …”

“… who, in defiance of the government, and reckless of the weal and woe of their customers, were determined to persevere in it. But unreasonable as were these dram-sellers …”

“… it is not supposed that drunkard-makers and drunkard-killers at the Islands, differed materially in heart or principle, from those of the same class in civilized towns and cities, where the general voice of the wise and good is against this dangerous traffic.”

“In about 1831, Voluntary pledges of abstinence were encouraged by the missionaries with success. At this juncture a temperance society was formed, embracing the four noblemen, Adams [Kuakini], Hoapili, Kaikieowa and Naihe, and other chiefs.”

“The resolutions which they adopted (not quite up to the standard of later times), and to which thousands in the different islands agreed, were creditable, and being translated into English, are as follows:”

“Hawaiian Temperance Society.

  1. We will not drink ardent spirits for pleasure.
  2. We will not traffic in ardent spirits for gain.
  3. We will not engage in distilling ardent spirts.
  4. We will not treat our relatives, acquaintances, or strangers, with ardent spirits, except with the consent of a temperate physician.
  5. We will not give ardent spirits to workmen on account of their labor.”

“No ruler, who is responsible for the peace of the community, could, therefore, rightfully license a grog-shop in such a community as was then found at Honolulu.”

“How utterly impracticable would it be on board a ship of war, or within the walls of a State’s Prison, with the most rigid rules, to restrain rum-loving men from confusion and violence, if a rum-seller were licensed to sell or give them freely the intoxicating draught.”

“Some dealers, admitting that there might be reasons for restraining the natives from ruining their families, their souls, and bodies, at the dram-shop, besought the governor to give them license to sell to foreigners only. To this he replied sarcastically, ‘To horses, cattle, and hogs, sell rum, but not to real men.’” (Hiram Bingham; 21 years)

But, what did the missionaries do/how did they feel only 10-years prior?

As noted in James Hunnewell’s log for their day of departure, “October 24, 1819 (O)n the passengers examining their stores, they found a short supply of that article at day light Capt. Blanchard went up to Boston at 11 am (October 24, 1819).  Captain Blanchard returned from town with a supply of bread & spirits for the missionaries.” (James Hunnewell Log)

Lucia Ruggles Holman confirms this in her diary’s November 6, 1819 entry, “Saturday Morning, 15th day after sailing: My Dear Brothers: We weighed anchor soon after you left us. A gentle gale wafted us about 10 miles that day, when we had a calm, which detained us till the next morning.”

“A kind providence seemed to order it for the best, however, for, in the course of the evening, it was ascertained that our soft bread and crackers and all the ardent spirits were left behind.  Consequently, a boat was sent off for Boston that night, which did not return until the next day towards night.” (Holman)

So, the departure of the Pioneer Company, bound for Hawai‘i was delayed a day, so the missionaries could stock up on “that article,” their “ardent spirits” [strong distilled liquors].

While not necessarily a booze cruise, the missionaries continued to have their alcohol.  Shortly after their arrival in the Islands, anchoring April 4, 1820 at Kailua Kona, they were soon ‘treated’ with glasses of wine …

“As soon as we approached the beach we were discovered by the natives, who flocked-about the boat in such swarms that it was with much difficulty we could land and force our way to the King’s house, which was about 20 rods from the water.”

“When we arrived at the door we found the King at breakfast on his mat; we took our seats and were soon treated with a glass of wine, and invited to stay and dine. Soon after the Queens made their appearance, each attended by a servant holding a feather fly brush in their hands.”  (April 7, 1820, Samuel Ruggles)

Lucia Holman referenced the same dining experience, noting, “We returned about 1 Oc. to the house of his Royal Majesty (Oreho-reho, son of the deceased King) where we dined upon roast pig, fowls, vegetables, well dressed, etc., etc. – a glass of wine crowned the dish.” (April 7, 1820, Lucia Holman)

Others supplied them with the fermented beverage … “The fourth day after our arrival, the King sent us a Mahogany (koa) round table with six drawers, which answer the place of a cupboard.”

“A few weeks after our arrival on shore we were visited by 2 English Captains (whalers) who had come to these Islands for water and provisions. From them we secured many valuable presents, such as crockery, wine, butter, and each of us a chair.” (Lucia Holman)

When Ruggles and Whitney delivered Humehume home to his father King Kaumualiʻi on May 3, 1820, their ‘excellent’ supper was topped with brandy, gin and wine …

“A supper was soon provided for us consisting of a couple of hogs baked, whole after the American manner, several fowls and a dog cooked after the style of the Island, together with potatoes, tarro, bananas, cocoanuts, and watermelons, brandy, gin, wines, &c. The table was set in good style; our supper was indeed excellent.” (May 3, 1820, Samuel Ruggles)

Anthony D Allen (a former slave from the continent) had his home (including about a dozen other houses) at about where the Washington Middle School is situated.  Several references note his property as a “resort;” “… it is a favourite resort of the more respectable of the seamen who visit Honoruru. …” (Reverend Charles Stewart)  It may have been Waikiki’s first hotel.

“His plantation is two miles from the Mission House on the plain, towards Waititi. The road to it, although on the plain, is uncultivated and entirely unshaded, affords the most pleasant walk in the immediate vicinity of Honoruru.”

Allen entertained often and made his property available for special occasions.  “King (Kauikeaouli – Kamehameha III) had a Grand Dinner at AD Allen’s. The company came up at sunset. Music played very late.”  (Reynolds – Scruggs, HJH)

Missionaries Hiram and Sybil Bingham also visited.  Sybil noted in her diary, “To avoid walking in the heat, we made ourselves ready by ten – locked up our houses and set off. A multitude had assembled by the time we were at the gate, to attend us. Our little handcart, the only wheels, I believe on the Island, served for a carriage for those for whom the walk might prove too great.”

“He set upon the table decanters and glasses with wine and brandy to refresh us”.  They ended dinner “with wine and melons”.  (June 24, 1820, Sybil Bingham)

As late as 1827, the Honolulu mission ran in effect a liquor store for its members. From May 15, 1826, to May 2, 1827: “Hiram Bingham bought on his personal account 7 ½ gal. of wine, 6 ¾ gal., 1 pt. and a bottle of rum, 4 gal. of brandy, 1 doz. bottles of porter, and 4 bottles of port. Elisha Loomis bought 8 gal., 1 pt. of wine, 1 gal. of rum, and 1 ½ gal. of brandy.”

“Abraham Blatchley bought 4 gal. of brandy, 2 gal. of rum, and 2 gal. of gin. Joseph Goodrich bought 2 ½ gal. of wine and 1 qt. of rum. Samuel Ruggles bought 1 ¼ gal. of brandy and 2 ¼ gal. of wine. Levi Chamberlain bought 3 qts. of wine and 2 qts. of brandy. The Medical Department drew 4 gal. of rum.  After May 1827, recorded purchases dwindled to a stop.” (Greer)

We even see some references to beer (brewing and drinking) in missionary journals.  On November 19-20, 1824, missionary Elisha Loomis notes, “Yesterday and today I have been engaged in making beer and vinegar from a root called tee, which grows plentifully in these islands. It is the most sweet of any vegetable I ever tasted. The juice is nearly as sweet as molasses.”

On October 31, 1832, Clarissa Armstrong (wife of Reverend Richard Armstrong) noted, “Capt. Brayton has given me a little beer cask – it holds 6 quarts – Nothing could have been more acceptable.”

“I wanted to ask you for one, but did not like to. O how kind providence has been & is to us, in supplying our wants. The board have sent out hops – & I have some beer now a working. I should like to give you a drink.”

On July 24, 1836, Clarissa Armstrong notes (during an illness:) “We had a bottle of wine of which I drank … All the nourishment I took after leaving Honolulu til we reached Wailuku was two biscuit about the size of small crackers, & a bit of dried beef.”

“Drinks were my nourishment. Limes grow at Oahu & I obtained some for the voyage, which furnished me pleasant drink. Also a little beer which I had made.”

However, they shortly got on the bandwagon against liquor and encouraged King Kamehameha III and most of the chiefs to pledge themselves to total abstinence.  And, in part, became zealous preachers of temperance; the king himself frequently addressing the people on the subject.  (The King and others regularly fell off the water wagon.)

In March 1838, the first liquor license law was enacted, which prohibited all selling of liquors without a license under a fine of fifty dollars for the first offense, to be increased by the addition of fifty dollars for every repetition of the offense.  (The Friend, December 1887)

All houses for the sale of liquor were to be closed at ten o’clock at night, and from Saturday night until Monday morning.  Drunkenness was prohibited in the licensed houses under a heavy fine to the drinker, and the loss of his license to the seller.  (The Friend, December 1887)

In 1843, the seamen’s chaplain, Samuel C. Damon, started ‘The Temperance Advocate and Seamen’s Friend;’ he soon changed its name to simply “The Friend.”   Through it, he offered ‘Six Hints to seamen visiting Honolulu’ (the Friend, October 8, 1852,) his first ‘Hint,’ “Keep away from the grog shops.”

Later, in hopes that free drinking water would entice sailors to stay out of nearby grog shops, “The Temperance Legion has caused to be erected a Drinking Fountain at the corner of King and Bethel streets, on the Bethel premises – a neat and ornamental fountain. … ‘Free to all.’ … so the Friends of Temperance would cause a Fountain of pure water to (low through all coming time, where all may drink.” [dedicated, June 15, 1867] (The Friend, June 1, 1867) (The image shows the fountain at the Bethel.)

© 2024 Ho‘okuleana LLC

by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Who Came Next?

Significant advances in radiocarbon dating and the targeted re-dating of key Eastern Polynesian and Hawaiian sites has strongly supported and suggested that initial Polynesian discovery and colonization of the Hawaiian Islands occurred between approximately AD 1000 and 1200.  (Kirch)

Who came next – the English, Japanese, Chinese, Spanish …?

English

In the dawn hours of January 18, 1778, on his third expedition, British explorer Captain James Cook on the HMS Resolution and Captain Charles Clerke of the HMS Discovery first sighted and made ‘Contact’ with what Cook named the Sandwich Islands (that were later named the Hawaiian Islands.)

But, was Cook the first foreigner to find Hawaiʻi?  Some suggest that Cook’s references to the Hawaiian interest in iron, and some of the iron implements noted by Cook’s crew at the time of his Contact suggest contact prior to the Englishmen Cook and his crew.

Since some of the terms for ‘iron’ also are applied to ‘foreigners,’ the indications are that the various Polynesians learned of iron, either directly through foreigners, or by means of wreckage from foreign ships.  The early Polynesians were not iron producers, because, valuing the metal as they did, they apparently were unable to obtain it by smelting.  (Stokes)

Japanese

There is reference to Japanese contact well before Cook’s time.  Kalākaua’s ‘The Legends and Myths of Hawaii’ titled ‘Iron Knife’.  It speaks of early Japanese visitors to the Islands and the Japanese captain’s sword – the time frame is about the 1300s.

“It was late in the afternoon that word had been brought to Wakalana that a strange vessel was approaching the coast. As it was high out of water and drifting broadside before the wind, it appeared to be of great size”.

“The name of the captain was Kaluiki-a-Manu; the four others were called Neleike, Malaea, Haakoa and Hika – all names of Hawaiian construction. Two of them – Neleike and Malaea – were women, the former being the sister of the captain.”

Wakalana “was charmed with the bright eyes and fair face of Neleike, the sister of the captain. He found a pleasure that was new to him in teaching her to speak his language, and almost the first use she made of [this] was to say ‘yes’ with it when he asked her to become his wife.”

“Neleike became the progenitor of a family which for generations showed the marks of her blood, and that the descendants of the others were plentiful thereafter, not only on Maui but in the neighborhood of Waimalo, on the island of Oahu.”

“The object of the rescued Japanese which attracted most attention was the sword accidentally preserved by the captain.  No such terrible knife had ever before been seen or dreamed of by the natives…. The sword of Kaluiki, the ransom of a king, remained for some generations with the descendants of Kukona; but what became of it in the end tradition fails to tell.”  (Kalākaua)

Japanese Junks

Japanese junks have been blown to sea, and finally stranded with their occupants upon distant islands, and have reached even the continent of America, in the 46th degree of north latitude.  (Jarves)

“[M]ention is made of several Japanese vessels reported in some of the Spanish-American ports on the Pacific. In 1617 a Japanese junk belonging to Magomé, was at Acapulco.” (Brooks)

“According to the traditions of the islands, several such junks had been wrecked upon Hawaii, before the islands were discovered by Captain Cook.”  (Brooks)

Hawai‘i had its share of Japanese contact, directedly in the Islands, as well as by sailors at sea.  Beachcombing finds of Japanese glass balls (fishing floats,) as well as marine debris from the 2011 Japan tsunami, suggest the possibility of earlier Japan contact with the Islands (especially in the context that a Japanese fishing boat and its survivors landed in the Islands in 1832.)

Chinese

“Every junk found adrift or stranded on the coast of North America, or on the Hawaiian or adjacent islands, has on examination proved to be Japanese, and no single instance of any Chinese vessel has ever been reported, nor is any believed to have existed.” (Brooks)

Spanish

Back to the ‘iron’ reference … the first written Hawaiian word is ‘Hamaite’ – it was spoken to Captain Cook at the time he made contact with the Islands and he wrote it in his journal.

It was made in reference to iron.  Some suggest it refers to Hematite (ferric oxide – a mineral form of iron oxide – that is Hematita in Spanish.)  However, others suggest ‘Hamaite’ is actually a Hawaiian expression of He maita‘i – good.  (Schutz) 

“There are many ways by which such people may get pieces of iron, or acquire the knowledge of the existence of such a metal, without ever having had an immediate connection with nations that use it.”

“It can hardly be doubted that it was unknown to all the inhabitants of this sea, before Magellan led the way into it; for no discoverer, immediately after his voyage, ever found any of this metal in their possession …”

“… though, in the course of our late voyages it has been observed, that the use of it was known at several islands, to which no former European ships had ever, as far as we know, found their way.” (Cook)

Spanish Galleons (1565 -1815 AD)

We know the Spanish crossed the Pacific, between the Philippines and Acapulco for 250-years.  The term Manila Galleons is used to refer to the trade route between Acapulco and Manila, which lasted from 1565 to 1815. (Alchetron)

The Manila Galleons made round-trip voyages once or twice per year across the Pacific Ocean from the port of Acapulco (present-day Mexico) to Manila in the Philippines which were both part of New Spain.

Kulou (‘to bow down’) (1527 AD)

“Hernando Cortez, immediately after his conquest of Mexico, fitted out an expedition on the western coast to reinforce his countrymen …  [they] sailed from Zacatula, Mexico, Oct. 31, 1527.”  (Alexander) Two of his ships were lost during a storm [one is said to have landed in Hawai‘i]. (Univ of Wellington)

“A well known Hawaiian tradition relates that in the reign of Keliiokaloa, son of Umi, a foreign vessel was wrecked at Keei, South Kona, Hawaii. According to the tradition, only the captain and his sister reached the shore in safety. From their kneeling on the beach and remaining a long time in that posture, the place was called Kulou (to stoop, to bow,) as it is unto this day.”  (Alexander 1892)

“These strangers intermarried with the Hawaiians, and were the progenitors of certain well known families of chiefs, as for instance, that of Kaikioewa, former Governor of Kauai.“  (Alexander 1892)

Jarves expanded on the story, “In the reign of Kealiiokaloa, son of Umi, thirteen generations of kings before Cook’s arrival … a vessel, called by the natives Konaliloha, arrived at Pale, Keei, on the south side of Kealakeakua bay, Hawaii.”

“The spot where this took place, is known at the present day, by the appellation of Kulou, to bow down. The shipwrecked strangers were hospitably received, invited to the dwellings of the natives, and food placed before them.”  (Jarves 1843)

Gaetano and Mapping of the Islas de Mesa (1555 AD)

“Old Spanish charts and a 1613 AD Dutch globe suggest that explorers from Spain had sighted Hawaiʻi long before Captain Cook.  When Cook arrived in 1778, galleons laden with silver from the mines of Mexico and South America had been passing south of Hawaiʻi for two centuries on annual round trip voyages of 17,000 miles between Acapulco and Manila.”  (Kane)

“It seems to be almost certain that one Juan Gaetano, a Spanish navigator, saw Hawaii in 1555 AD. A group of islands, the largest of which was called La Mesa, was laid down in the old Spanish charts in the same latitude as the Hawaiian Islands, but 10 degrees too far east.”  (Hawaiʻi Department of Foreign Affairs, 1896)

“There are undoubted proofs of the discovery of the Hawaiian Islands by the Spaniard, Juan Gaetano. This is the first known record of the islands among the civilised nations.”  (Westervelt 1923)

La Perouse noted, when he briefly visited the Islands (1786,) “In the charts, at the foot of this archipelago, might be written: ‘Sandwich Islands, surveyed in 1778 by Captain Cook, who named them, anciently discovered by the Spanish navigators.’”  (La Perouse, Fornander)

“By all the documents that have been examined, it is demonstrated that the discovery dates from the year 1555 and that the discoverer was Juan Gaetano or Gaytan.”

“The principal proof is an old manuscript chart, registered in these archives as anonymous, and in which the Sandwich Islands are laid down under that name, but which also contains a note declaring that he called them Islas de Mesa”.  (Spanish Colonial Office letter to the Governor of the Philippines, The Friend May 1927)

“(H)e called them “Islas de Mesa” (Table Islands.) There are besides, other islands, situated in the same latitude, but 10° further east, and respectively named “La Mesa” (the table), “La Desgraciado” (the unfortunate), “Olloa,” and “Los Monges” (the Monks.)” 

Gaetano passed through the northern part of the Pacific and discovered large islands which he marked upon a chart as “Los Majos.” One of the islands was named “The Unfortunate.” Three other smaller islands were called “The Monks.”  (Westervelt 1923)

In 1743, English captain George Anson set sail for the Pacific to attack Spanish galleons (English and Spain were at war at the time.)  Overcoming the ‘Nuestra Senora de Covadonga,’ he found a “chart of all the ocean between the Philippines and the coasts of Mexico.”

A cluster of islands were noted in mid-ocean; the island La Mesa is on the same latitude of the Island of Hawaiʻi and its southern contour resembles the southern coastline of Hawaiʻi; however, they are noted east of their actual location.  (Kane)

How could the Islands be mis-mapped to the east? … Until 1744 and the development of the chronometer, determining longitude was an historic problem for navigators.  Longitude (East-West) was estimated by distances a ship covered within various periods of time, estimated by the ship’s speed during each period.  (Kane)

Ship speed was measured with a block of wood attached to a line with knots tied at intervals.  The ‘log’ was cast from the sterns and the number of ‘knots’ run out during a certain time interval enabled the navigator to calculate his speed.  However, this method doesn’t address the west-bound ocean current that would effectively place a position east of its true position.  (Kane)

For more information on this, click the link:

Click to access Who-Came-Next.pdf

© 2024 Ho‘okuleana LLC

by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Rupert’s Land

The Thirty Years’ War (1618 to 1648) was one of the longest conflicts in European history; the primary cause of war was the actions of Holy Roman Emperor Ferdinand II in forcing the Protestants into Catholicism. Prince Frederick, a Calvinist, sided with the Protestants and became King of Bohemia and lived in Hiradcany Castle in the Rhine.

Frederick’s wife was Princess Elizabeth, the older sister of King Charles I of England, Scotland and Ireland. They had a son Prince Rupert. The family was forced into exile; following Frederick’s death (1632), Elizabeth sent Rupert to England (in 1635). He later became the first head of Hudson’s Bay Company (HBC) in what is now Canada.

In 1670, King Charles II of England granted a royal charter to create the Hudson’s Bay Company, under the governorship of the king’s cousin Prince Rupert of the Rhine. According to the Charter, the HBC received rights to:

“The sole Trade and Commerce of all those Seas, Streights, Bays, Rivers, Lakes, Creeks, and Sounds, in whatsoever Latitude they shall be, that lie within the entrance of the Streights commonly called Hudson’s Streights …”

“together with all the Lands, Countries and Territories, upon the Coasts and Confines of the Seas, Streights, Bays, Lakes, Rivers, Creeks and Sounds, aforesaid, which are not now actually possessed by any of our Subjects, or by the Subjects of any other Christian Prince or State …”

“and that the said Land be from henceforth reckoned and reputed as one of our Plantations or Colonies in America, called Rupert’s Land.”

The Royal Charter of 1670 granted “the Governor and Company of Adventurers of England trading into Hudson Bay” exclusive trading rights over the entire Hudson Bay drainage system.

This territory was vast, and the Crown had little knowledge of the land or the people calling it home. According to the Royal Charter, the land was “unoccupied”, or not “actually possessed by any of our Subjects, or by the Subjects of any other Christian Prince or State.”

Rupert’s Land (aka Prince Rupert’s Land) was a vast territory of northern wilderness. It represented a third of what is now Canada.  At the time, King Charles II had no idea that this encompassed about 1.5-million square miles.

In terms of modern geo-political boundaries, Rupert’s Land covered northern Quebec, northern Ontario, much of the three prairie provinces, and most of southern Nunavut.  It also included parts of Montana, Minnesota, and North and South Dakota.

For HBC, Rupert’s Land provided an entry point into the fur trade, and although the Charter outlined a clear purpose for the land and its resources, its boundaries were ambiguously defined.

Expanding HBC’s geographical network and understanding of the land relied on Indigenous local knowledge and alliances. Exploring and mapping the region was motivated by economic and political goals, especially as HBC was confronted by other commercial enterprises challenging its claim to exclusive trading rights within the territory. (HBC Heritage)

The royal charter did not apply to any parts of Rupert’s Land “actually possessed” by “any other Christian Prince or State,” but made no mention of the many First Nations who actually held sovereignty within the territory.

At the time, the Hudson’s Bay Company’s actual claim to the land was limited to small sites for trading posts and safe passage between those posts. (University of Winnipeg)

From 1670 (to 1870), it was the exclusive commercial domain of the Hudson’s Bay Company and the primary trapping grounds of the fur trade. 

The maritime fur trade focused on acquiring furs of beavers, sea otters, seals and other animals from the Pacific Northwest Coast and Alaska.  The furs were mostly sold in China in exchange for tea, silks, porcelain and other Chinese goods, which were then sold in Europe and the US.

Needing supplies in their journey, the traders soon realized they could economically barter for provisions in Hawai‘i; for instance any type of iron, a common nail, chisel or knife, could fetch far more fresh fruit meat and water than a large sum of money would in other ports.

A triangular trade network emerged linking the Pacific Northwest coast, China and the Hawaiian Islands to Britain and the United States (especially New England).

Then, on July 1, 1867, a federation of colonies in British North America – New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Quebec and Ontario – joined together to become the Dominion of Canada. Under the British North America Act, 1867, the Queen remained head of state, represented nationally in Canada by the Governor General and in each province by a Lieutenant Governor.

The British North America Act provided the constitutional framework for Canada’s current federal system by defining broad areas of federal and provincial jurisdiction​​. Such national matters as defense, postal service, criminal law, and banks are under federal authority. Education, health, and natural resources are primarily among the provinces’ responsibilities.

On March 30, 1867, just one day​ after the British North America Act received Royal Assent in London, the United States purchased Alaska from Russia.​ With the American purchase of Alaska (Americans had just paid Russia $7.2 million for Alaska), Canadians were looking for other properties to expand the Republic and eyed the territory.

Canada’s Prime Minister, Sir John A MacDonald, was anxious to gain control of Rupert’s Land. He wanted it to be annexed to the new Dominion of Canada to prevent its annexation by the US.

In his mind, if he was successful, he could expand the Dominion both North and West. Canada saw Rupert’s Land as the natural extension of its new nation which included Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Ontario and Quebec.

George Brown, editor of The Globe and a Father of Confederation, described it as “the vast and fertile territory which is our birthright – and which no power on earth can prevent us occupying.”

The prophecy in the country’s motto, “He shall have Dominion from sea to sea” (Psalm 72:8), would be fulfilled. He would also strengthen Canada’s presence in North America next to the United States. (Christian Roots Canada)

The once powerful Hudson’s Bay Company controlled the area. But the British fur trade giant had been in decline for years and it was preparing to sell Rupert’s Land.

On March 20, 1869, the Hudson’s Bay Company, under pressure from Great Britain, sold Rupert’s Land to the Government of Canada for $1.5 million. The sale involved roughly a quarter of the continent; it is the largest real estate transaction (by land area) in the country’s history.

The purchase of Rupert’s Land transformed Canada geographically. It changed from a modest country in the northeast of the continent into an expansive one that reached across North America. Rupert’s Land was eventually divided among Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and the Northwest Territories.

Today, Prince Rupert’s name remains a part of Canadian geography. He is the namesake of the city of Prince Rupert, British Columbia, the Prince Rupert neighborhood in northwest Edmonton and Quebec’s Rupert River, which drains into Rupert Bay on James Bay.  (Information here is from Canadian Encyclopedia, Canada’s History, Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Hudson’s Bay Company and Legislative Assembly of BC.))

© 2024 Ho‘okuleana LLC