Ahupuaa | Images of Old Hawaiʻi

May 9, 2023 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Ahupua‘a – Maybe It’s Also A People Management System

Most writers romanticize the “ahupua‘a system” solely in the context of ecology and resource management – there is minimal (almost no) discussion that the sociological aspect of the separation and distribution of people may have also played a part in the ahupua‘a.

“(I)n the earliest times all the people were alii … it was only after the lapse of several generations that a division was made into commoners and chiefs” (Malo)

Kamakau noted, in early Hawaiʻi “The parents were masters over their own family group … No man was made chief over another.” Essentially, the extended family was the socio, biological, economic and political unit.

“In very ancient times, the lands were not divided and an island was left without divisions such as kalana, ʻokana, ahupuaʻa, and ʻili, but in the time when the lands became filled with people, the lands were divided, with the proper names for this place and that place so that they could be known.” (Kamakau)

As the population increased and wants and needs increased in variety and complexity (and it became too difficult to satisfy them with finite resources,) the need for chiefly rule became apparent.

The arrival of Pā‘ao from Tahiti in about the thirteenth century resulted in the establishment (or, at least expanded upon) a religious and political code in old Hawai`i, collectively called the kapu system.

Pā‘ao reportedly initiated a lineage of kings, starting with Pili Ka‘aiea (the 1st “Aliʻi ʻAimoku” for the Big Island – the first ruler (sometimes called the “king”) of the island.)

“The common people were called the maka‘ainana, literally ‘on-the-land [folk] .’ According to native genealogical history, they were of the same stock as the ali‘i but without claim to noble status or rank. This was because no strict rules governed their unions, as in the case of the nobility, with respect to genealogical equality or precedence.”

“They were the planters, the fishermen, and the craftsmen. Whether they were planters or fishers, they were tenants, not freeholders. As long as they were loyal to the ali‘i on whose land they dwelt, their land holdings, homesites, and fishing rights were secure.”

“Theirs was the right, if they pleased, to leave their home district or island and settle elsewhere under another chief.” (Pukui and Handy)

Life in the ahupua‘a was not idyllic … “The condition of the common people was that of subjection to the chiefs, compelled to do their heavy tasks, burdened and oppressed, some even to death. The life of the people was one of patient endurance, of yielding to the chiefs to purchase their favor. The plain man (kanaka) must not complain.”

“If the people were slack in doing the chief’s work they were expelled from their lands, or even put to death. For such reasons as this and because of the oppressive exactions made upon them, the people held the chiefs in great dread and looked upon them as gods.”

“Only a small portion of the kings and chiefs ruled with kindness; the large majority simply lorded it over the people.”

“It was from the common people, however, that the chiefs received their food and their apparel for men and women, also their houses and many other things. When the chiefs went forth to war some of the commoners also went out to fight on the same side with them.”

“It was the makaainanas also who did all the work on the land; yet all they produced from the soil belonged to the chiefs; and the power to expel a man from the land and rob him of his possessions lay with the chief.” (Malo)

As populations grew, so did potential for rivalry amongst family and Chiefs.

Just as the ‘divide and rule’ (or, divide and conquer) strategy to create physical divisions among the subjects to prevent alliances that could challenge the ruler helped rulers across the globe centuries prior, it s plausible that was also part of the motivation in dividing the Hawai‘i lands and dispersing the people.

As chiefdoms developed, the simple pecking order of titles and status likely evolved into a more complex and stratified structure. The actual number of chiefs was few, but their retainers attached to the courts (advisors, konohiki, priests, warriors, etc) were many.

In addition to the expanded demand to provide food for the courts, commoners were also obliged to make new lines of products for the chiefs – feather cloaks, capes, helmets, images and ornaments.

Likewise, as challenges were made between chiefly realms, warfare and the resultant demand for services in combat increased. “Maka‘āinana … certainly did march with chiefly retinues on some occasions. The degree to which maka‘āinana were mobilised varied according to the nature of the undertaking, or the seriousness of the threat posed.”

“Kamakau relates that, when an O‘ahu army invaded Moloka‘i in the mid-part of the 18th century, it was not until the fifth day of fighting that every able-bodied man within range of the battlefield came out of his house to fight.”

“Maka‘āinana levies were almost certainly more useful defending their own localities than bolstering forces invading other polities or other islands for logistical reasons. Practice varied.” (D’Archy)

When you look at it (without the influence of the repeated/glamorized descriptors, i.e., it’s all (and only) about resource protection) you can see that the ahupua‘a may also be about sociology (not just ecology).

Yes … because the population was distributed around each of the islands and not concentrated into villages, impacts to the resources are minimized. However, because of the dispersal of people, that also meant potential opponents had a harder time organizing dispersed people against you.

It was not always a peaceful time. Island rulers, Aliʻi or Mōʻī, typically ascended to power through familial succession and warfare. In those wars, Hawaiians were killing Hawaiians; sometimes the rivalries pitted members of the same family against each other.

Going back to Pi‘ilani (generally, about the time Columbus was sailing across the Atlantic) … Pi‘ilani died at Lāhainā and the kingdom of Maui passed to his son, Lono-a-Piʻilani. Pi‘ilani had directed that the kingdom go to Lono, and that Kiha-a-Piʻilani (Lono’s brother) serve under him. In the early years of Lono-a-Piʻilani’s reign all was well; that changed.

Lono-a-Piʻilani became angry, because he felt Kiha-a-Piʻilani was trying to seize the kingdom for himself. Lono sought to kill Kiha; so Kiha fled in secret to Molokaʻi and later to Lānaʻi. When Kiha, with chiefs, warriors and a fleet of war canoes, made their way to attack Lono; Lono trembled with fear of death, and died. (Kamakau)

The same happened when Liloa from Waipio died; Liloa named his son Hakau as heir to his kingdom, Umi, Liloa’s other son was given the Hawaiian god of war Kūkaʻilimoku. The brothers didn’t get along and Umi killed Hakau and took control of the kingdom.

Fast forward to Kamehameha’s time, sibling (and cousin) rivalries continued … Following Kalaniʻōpuʻu’s death in 1782, the kingship was inherited by his son Kīwalaʻō; Kamehameha (Kīwalaʻō’s cousin) was given Kūkaʻilimoku.

Dissatisfied with subsequent redistricting of the lands by district chiefs, civil war ensued between Kīwalaʻō’s forces and the various chiefs under the leadership of his cousin Kamehameha.

In the first major skirmish, in the battle of Mokuʻōhai (a fight between Kamehameha and Kiwalaʻo in July, 1782 at Keʻei, south of Kealakekua Bay on the Island of Hawaiʻi,) Kiwalaʻo was killed by Kamehameha’s forces.

With the death of his cousin Kiwalaʻo, the victory made Kamehameha chief of the districts of Kona, Kohala and Hāmākua, while Keōua, the brother of Kiwalaʻo, held Kaʻū and Puna, and Keawemauhili declared himself independent of both in Hilo. (Kalākaua) Keōua was later killed by Kamehameha Chiefs.

“It is supposed that some six thousand of the followers of this chieftain (Kamehameha,) and twice that number of his opposers, fell in battle during his career, and by famine and distress occasioned by his wars and devastations from 1780 to 1796.”

“However, the greatest loss of life according to early writers was not from the battles, but from the starvation of the vanquished and consequential sickness due to destruction of food sources and supplies – a recognized part of Hawaiian warfare.” (Bingham)

And, shortly after Kamehameha’s death … King Kamehameha II (Liholiho) declared an end to the kapu system. Kekuaokalani, Liholiho’s cousin, opposed the abolition of the kapu system and assumed the responsibility of leading those who opposed its abolition. These included priests, members of his court and the traditional territorial chiefs of the middle rank.

After attempts to settle peacefully, the two powerful cousins engaged at the final battle of Kuamoʻo Liholiho had more men, more weapons and more wealth to ensure his victory. He sent his prime minister, Kalanimōku, to defeat his cousin. Kekauaokalani was killed, as was his wife Manono and his forces were routed.

Dividing the Land

“According to Hawaiian traditions, the system of ahupua‘a divisions was created by rulers who unified or centralized governance of their respective islands, such as Ma‘ilikukahi on O‘ahu and ‘Umi on Hawai‘i Island.” (Gonschor and Beamer)

On Maui, Kalaihaʻōhia, a kahuna (priest, expert,) is credited with the division of Maui Island into districts (moku) and sub-districts, during the time of the aliʻi Kakaʻalaneo at the end of the 15th century or the beginning of the 16th century. (McGerty)

“The people of old gave names for the island’s different parts through their observing until their ideas became clear and precise, there are two names used on an island, moku is a name, ‘aina is another name, lands that were separated by the sea were called moku, lands where people resided were called moku.”

“The island (moku that is surrounded by water) is the main division, like, Hawai‘i, Maui and the rest of the island chain. (Islands) were divided up into sections inside of the island, called moku o loko, like such places as Kona on Hawai‘i island, and Hana on Maui island, and such divisions on these islands.”

“There sections were further divided into subdivision called ‘okana, or kalana; a poko is a subdivision of a ‘okana. These sections were further divided into smaller divisions called Ahupua’a, and sections smaller than an Ahupua‘a were called ‘ili ‘aina.”

“Divisions smaller than ‘ili ‘aina were mo‘o ‘aina and pauku ‘aina, and smaller than a pauku ‘aina was a kihapai, at this section the smaller divisions would be multiple Ko‘ele, Hakuone, and kuakua.” (Malo)

“An ali‘i nui (high chief) ruled the mokupuni. He appointed an ali‘i ‘ai moku (lower chief) to rule each moku. The ali‘i ‘ai moku chose a chief of lesser rank, an ali‘i ‘ai ahupua‘a, to rule the ahupua‘a. Often the ali‘i ‘ai ahupua‘a was not a resident of the ahupua‘a when selected and the title was not hereditary.”

“Sometimes the ali‘i ‘ai ahupua‘a also served as the konohiki (headman) and ran the day-to-day operations of the ahupua‘a. The konohiki managed land use, assisted by luna who were experts in different specialties.” (Kamehameha Schools Press)

The ahupua‘a narrative doesn’t match reality … Look at ahupua‘a mapping and you will see that the ‘watershed’ ‘from the mountain to the sea’ divisions are really anomalies and not the norm for the ahupua‘a in the islands.

“One of the most persistent myths in popular narratives is the idea that ahupua‘a are usually stream drainages bounded by watersheds. Equating ahupua‘a to watersheds is problematic … Furthermore, empirical evidence clearly shows that most ahupua‘a do not correspond to a watershed.” (Gonschor and Beamer)

“Even if applying the most liberal interpretation of the concept, only 98 ahupua‘a (5.4%) can be regarded as bounded by watersheds. Of these there are none on Hawai‘i Island, 15 on Maui, i.e. 2.4% of Maui’s total of 636 ahupua‘a, and 8 of a total of 85 (9.4%) on Moloka‘i.”

“Only O‘ahu with 46 out of a 100 total ahupua‘a (46.0%) and Kaua‘i with 28 out of 82 (34.1%) have significant percentages of watershed-ahupua‘a. The vast majority of ahupua‘a throughout the islands, are regularly shaped (mauka to makai) but not watershed-bounded.” (Gonschor and Beamer)

“We caution … against generalizing the theory of economic self-sufficiency as well. Some, if a relatively small percentage, of the ahupua‘a could clearly not sustain themselves economically but would need to trade with neighboring ahupua‘a, for example, for fish and other marine materials in the landlocked ahupua‘a, and for agricultural products and possibly even fresh water in some of the smaller-sized ahupua‘a in leeward areas.” (Gonschor and Beamer)

So, maybe it’s not all about ecology; maybe sociology played a role, as well.

December 12, 2022 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Kalauao

At the time of Cook’s arrival (1778,) the Hawaiian Islands were divided into four kingdoms: (1) the island of Hawaiʻi under the rule of Kalaniʻōpuʻu, who also had possession of the Hāna district of east Maui; (2) Maui (except the Hāna district,) Molokaʻi, Lānaʻi and Kahoʻolawe, ruled by Kahekili; (3) Oʻahu, under the rule of Kahahana; and at (4) Kauaʻi and Niʻihau, Kamakahelei was ruler.

“At that time Kahekili was plotting for the downfall of Kahahana and the seizure of Oahu and Molokai, and the queen of Kauai was disposed to assist him in these enterprises.” (Kalākaua) Kamakahelei was married to Kāʻeokūlani (Kāʻeo – younger brother of Kahekili.) Kamakahelei and Kāʻeo had a son Kaumualiʻi (born in 1778 at Holoholokū.)

Kahekili and his eldest son and heir-apparent, Kalanikūpule, conquered Kahahana, adding Oʻahu under his control. And, in the late-1780s into 1790, Kamehameha conquered the Island of Hawai‘i and was pursuing conquest of Maui and eventually sought to conquer the rest of the archipelago.

The rich resources of the region, the shoreline fishponds, the numerous springs, and the fertile lands along the streams made ‘Ewa a prize for competing chiefs. Battles were fought for and on ‘Ewa lands, sometimes from competing O‘ahu chiefs, and sometimes by invading chiefs from other islands. (Cultural Surveys)

At the death of Kahekili in 1793, Kāʻeo became ruling chief of Maui, Molokaʻi and Lānaʻi. Kalanikūpule was ruler of Oʻahu. Homesick for his friends, Kāʻeo set out to return to Kauaʻi by way of Waialua and then to Waimea. He learned of a conspiracy to kill him and by November, 1794, Kāʻeo and Kalanikūpule were ready to fight. (Kamakau)

Kāʻeo was successful after some initial skirmishes. On December 12, 1794, a great battle was fought in the area between Kalauao and ‘Aiea in ‘Ewa. Kalanikūpule’s forces surrounded Kāʻeo. (Cultural Surveys)

Kāʻeo with six of his men escaped into a ravine below ‘Aiea and might have disappeared there had not the red of his feather cloak been seen from the boats at sea and there shots drawn the attention of those on land. Hemmed in from above, he was killed fighting bravely. (Kamakau)

This war, called Kukiʻiahu, was fought from November 16 to December 12, 1794 at Kalauao in ‘Ewa. (Kamakau) (It wasn’t long after that Kalanikūpule battled Kamehameha, again; and lost to Kamehameha at the Battle of Nuʻuanu.)

Kalauao Ahupua‘a (the multitude of clouds) extends from the East Loch of Pearl Harbor to the crest of the Koʻolau Range, generally following Kalauao Stream. Kalauao Spring is located near the Pearl Harbor coast.

The Kalauao Spring included two natural springs of percolating water. In ancient times, the springs irrigated taro loʻi. Later, the ancient taro lo‘i and ʻauwai (irrigation ditches) were modified and expanded to support rice cultivation.

In 1904, the area was described as, “On the morning of June 2nd, for instance, our destination was Aiea. At ten minutes past seven we boarded the first passenger train going towards Honolulu.”

“For a distance of eight miles the road skirts the shore and then turns landwards or mauka through rice and sugar plantations, Ewa Mill, Waipahu, Pearl City. …”

“Like all rice fields in Hawaii, this one is worked entirely by Chinamen, they alone being able to endure the conditions of location and climate necessary for the cultivation of this cereal.”

“On one side of the railroad track was the broad, muddy inland lake or bay of salt water, Pearl Harbor; on the other side were the terraced plots or fields, flooded to a depth of several inches with water and separated by narrow raised earthen ridges on which the careful Chinaman doubtless succeeded in walking, but which many times proved treacherous to our unsteady feet.”

“A rice plantation, laid out as it generally is on the low flats at the foot of a valley, where mountain streams empty into the sea, is an ideal collecting ground for certain kinds of algae.” (Thrum 1904)

In 1928, Moriichi and Makiyo Sumida began farming assorted wetland produce on a two-acre plot of land at the springs. Back then, the area of the springs contained many small farms growing similar produce — bananas, taro, rice, and watercress. Through the ensuing years, the Sumida property grew as they acquired neighboring leases and, by 1950, watercress became the sole crop. (NPS)

A small waterfall along Kalauao Stream, named Kahuawai (or Kahuewai), was located along the coastal trail connecting Honolulu to Waiʻanae. Kahuawai (water gourd container) was indicated to have been “a favorite resting place exclusively for chiefs”. (Cultural Surveys)

Kahuawai was a noted bathing place since ancient times and was guarded so that any one did not bathe in it except the chiefs. Later it was used by all. Kākuhihewa’s daughters and the hero Kalelealuaka (their husband) bathed in this pool. Kāʻeokūlani, the chief of Kauaʻi also bathed here when he came to war here on Oʻahu. (Cultural Surveys)

Loko Opu, a large fishpond (approximately 10.5-acres in size) located in Kalauao along the Pearl Harbor coast, is said to have been built by the chiefess Kalamanuʻia. (Cultural Surveys)

During the Māhele, much of the lands in the ahupua‘a of ‘Ewa, as in other districts, were awarded to Ali‘i Nui (high chiefs), who were either the grandchildren or great-grandchildren of Kamehameha I.

Half of the ahupua‘a of Kalauao was awarded to Laura Konia (either granddaughter or grandniece of Kamehameha I;) the other half of Kalauao Ahupua‘a was awarded to John Meek, an important merchant in the sandalwood trade.

Today, the Pearl Country Club covers much of the lower section of Kalauao. Pearlridge Shopping Center is on the lowest side of Kalauao (Pearlridge Uptown was opened in 1972, with an expansion in 1976 to include Pearlridge Downtown.) Pearlridge surrounds the evidence of the water resources of old, Kalauao Spring that benefits the Sumida watercress farm.

August 5, 2022 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Placial vs Spatial

In modern land description, the context is ‘spatial’ – we tend to reference things by their location, area and use – 123 Main Street, 10,000-square feet, residential.

Look at any map, GPS orientation or recall how you describe a place, etc, it’s all about space and location; you learn where you are and the physical context of it.

In old Hawaiʻi, it was the nature of ‘place’ that shaped the practical, cultural and spiritual view of the Hawaiian people.

In Hawaiian culture, natural and cultural resources are one and the same. Traditions describe the formation (literally the birth) of the Hawaiian Islands and the presence of life on, and around them, in the context of genealogical accounts.

All forms of the natural environment, from the skies and mountain peaks, to the watered valleys and lava plains, and to the shore line and ocean depths are believed to be embodiments of Hawaiian gods and deities. (Maly)

“The ancients gave names to the natural features of the land according to their ideas of fitness. … There were many names used by the ancients to designate appropriately the varieties of rain peculiar to each part of the island coast; the people of each region naming the varieties of rain as they deemed fitting. … The ancients also had names for the different winds.” (Malo)

Hawaiians named taro patches, rocks, trees, canoe landings, resting places in the forests and the tiniest spots where miraculous events are believed to have taken place. (hawaii-edu) There were names for everything, and multiple names for many.

Place names are often descriptive of: (1) the terrain, (2) an event in history, (3) the kind of resources a particular place was noted for or (4) the kind of land use which occurred in the area so named. Sometimes an earlier resident of a given land area was also commemorated by place names. (Maly)

“Cultural Attachment” embodies the tangible and intangible values of a culture – how a people identify with, and personify the environment around them.

It is the intimate relationship (developed over generations of experiences) that people of a particular culture feel for the sites, features, phenomena and natural resources etc, that surround them – their sense of place. This attachment is deeply rooted in the beliefs, practices, cultural evolution and identity of a people. (Kent)

In ancient Hawai‘i, most of the common people were farmers, a few were fishermen. Access to resources was tied to residency and earned as a result of taking responsibility to steward the environment and supply the needs of aliʻi. Tenants cultivated smaller crops for family consumption, to supply the needs of chiefs and provide tributes.

In this subsistence society, the family farming scale was far different from commercial-purpose agriculture. In ancient time, when families farmed for themselves, they adapted; products were produced based on need. The families were disbursed around the Islands. An orderly delineation became needed.

Māʻilikūkahi is noted for clearly marking and reorganizing land division palena (boundaries) on O‘ahu. Defined palena brought greater productivity to the lands; lessened conflict and was a means of settling disputes of future aliʻi who would be in control of the bounded lands; protected the commoners from the chiefs; and brought (for the most part) peace and prosperity. (Beamer, Duarte)

Fornander writes, “He caused the island to be thoroughly surveyed, and boundaries between differing divisions and lands be definitely and permanently marked out, thus obviating future disputes between neighboring chiefs and landholders.”

Kamakau tells a similar story, “When the kingdom passed to Māʻilikūkahi, the land divisions were in a state of confusion; the ahupuaʻa, the ku, the ʻili ʻāina, the moʻo ʻāina, the pauku ʻāina, and the kihāpai were not clearly defined.”

“Therefore, Māʻilikūkahi ordered the chiefs, aliʻi, the lesser chiefs, kaukau aliʻi, the warrior chiefs, puʻali aliʻi, and the overseers (luna) to divide all of Oʻahu into moku, ahupuaʻa, ʻili kupono, ʻili ʻaina, and moʻo ʻāina.”

What is commonly referred to as the “ahupuaʻa system” is a result of the firm establishment of palena (boundaries.) This system of land divisions and boundaries enabled a konohiki (land/resource manager) to know the limits and productivity of the resources that he managed.

Ahupuaʻa served as a means of managing people and taking care of the people who support them, as well as an easy form of collection of tributes by the chiefs. Ultimately, this helped in preserving resources.

A typical ahupuaʻa (what we generally refer to as watersheds, today) was a long strip of land, narrow at its mountain summit top and becoming wider as it ran down a valley into the sea to the outer edge of the reef. If there was no reef then the sea boundary would be about one and a half miles from the shore.

When the Hawaiians lived on the land as farmers and gatherers they became intimately acquainted with and named countless features and places.

Hawaiian customs and practices demonstrate the belief that all portions of the land and environment are related; the place names given to them tell us that areas are of cultural importance. (Maly)

This Placial versus Spatial context reflects the relationship of the people to the land.

“Sense of place is about the feeling that emanates from a place as a combination of the physical environment and the social construct of people activity (or absence of) that produces the feeling of a place. … People seek out Hawaiʻi because of the expectation of what its sense of place will be when they get there.” (Apo)

“Sense of place helps to define the relationships we have as hosts and guests, as well as how we treat one another and our surroundings.” (Taum)

“In the Hawaiian mind, a sense-of-place was inseparably linked with self-identity and self-esteem. To have roots in a place meant to have roots in the soil of permanence and continuity.”

“Almost every significant activity of his life was fixed to a place.”

“No genealogical chant was possible without the mention of personal geography; no myth could be conceived without reference to a place of some kind; no family could have any standing in the community unless it had a place; no place of significance, even the smallest, went without a name; and no history could have been made or preserved without reference, directly or indirectly, to a place.”

“So, place had enormous meaning for Hawaiians of old.” (Kanahele)

March 4, 2022 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Kīpapa Gulch

Place names help tell the stories of the place.

During the reign of Māʻilikūkahi, who ruled at about the same time Christopher Columbus crossed the Atlantic, invaders from Hawai‘i and Maui arrived on O‘ahu.

In the battles, the O‘ahu forces met the opposing forces in the uplands of Waipi‘o, and a great battle occurred.

Māʻilikūkahi was raised partly in Waialua and is said to have maintained a kulanakauhale (village) there.

Fornander writes, “He (Māʻilikūkahi) caused the island to be thoroughly surveyed, and boundaries between differing divisions and lands be definitely and permanently marked out, thus obviating future disputes between neighboring chiefs and landholders.”

Māʻilikūkahi is also known for a benevolent reign that was followed by generations of peace. He prohibited the chiefs from plundering the makaʻāinana, with punishment of death. His reign “ushered in an era of benign rule lasting for several generations.”

Thrum notes that while Māʻilikūkahi was peacefully disposed, he proved to be a brave defender of his realm in thoroughly defeating the invading forces.

Fornander suggests it was not considered a war between the two islands, but, rather, it was a raid by some restless and turbulent chiefs. The invading force first landed at Waikīkī and proceeded to ʻEwa and marched inland.

At Waikakalaua (an upland ʻili of Waikele) they met Māʻilikūkahi and his forces, and a bloody battle ensued. The fight continued from there to the Kīpapa gulch – stretching across Kīpapa (an ʻili of Waipiʻo,) Waikakalaua and the place known as Punaluʻu.

Tradition has it that the body count from the invaders was so great that it is said the area was paved (kīpapa “placed prone”) with their bodies.

Punaluʻu, an upland ʻili, was named for one of the invading warrior-chiefs killed during the battle. Another warrior-chief, Hilo, was also killed in the battle.

Poʻohilo (an ʻili of Honouliuli) is named from events following a battle in the Kīpapa-Waikakalaua region in which the head of Hilo was placed on a stake at this site and displayed.

Kanupo‘o (an ʻili of Waikele) may be translated as meaning, “planted skull” and seems to imply an event of some importance – it may be tied to events of the battle at Kīpapa and the naming of Po‘ohilo at Honouliuli.

Today, people suggest the gulch is ruled by the spirits of fallen warriors; there are reports that this is one of the paths of the Huakaiʻpo (night marchers) and other reports suggest a woman dressed in white hitchhiking.

The area was also a temporary home to the Naval Air Station Kipapa Field / Kipapa Army Airfield. It was used because it could accommodate two 5,000′ runways free from obstructions (however, concerns were raised about increased air congestion due to its proximity between Pearl Harbor and Wheeler Field.)

The airfield site is located south the Mililani Golf Course between Meheula Parkway and Hokuala Streets – the runways extended out to the edge of the gulch. Mililani District Park is located near the intersection of the 2 main runways.

The use of this site by the Navy would permit the concentration of carrier-group training for Naval aviation on the south side of the island of Oahu including Barber’s Point, Kīpapa Gulch, and Ford Island.

But it was not until sometime after the United States entered World War II that Kipapa Airfield was developed; the exact start date is not clear, but 1943 maps note the facility.

During the war it apparently saw little use by the Navy due to the fact that carrier aircraft were constantly deployed during the war. The Army Air Corps became the principal user of the airfield by default.

Aircraft from this airfield searched & patrolled over the surrounding Pacific area, maintaining a 24-hour vigil to avert any attack with a large number and variety of squadrons are documented to have been stationed at Kipapa Airfield during World War II.

Kipapa Field was evidently closed at some point between 1959 and 1961 (it was no longer depicted on the 1961 and later mapping.)

February 12, 2022 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Kālaiʻāina

Early on, with the family unit being the socio-political structure, there was no need for a hierarchical or complex society. However, as the population increased and wants and needs increased in variety and complexity, the need for chiefly rule became apparent.

Eventually, a highly stratified society evolved consisting of the Ali‘i (ruling class,) Kahuna (priestly and expert class of craftsmen, fishers and professionals) and Makaʻāinana (commoner class.)

The concept of private ownership of property did not exist in Hawaiʻi. The Kings were the sovereign owners of all of the land which was in turn controlled by the aliʻi nui or high chiefs and tended or farmed by the kanaka or commoners. (RE3)

Laws and rules, called kapu, were created to prohibit abuse of resources, both to the land and ocean. The kapu prohibited certain practices in order to preserve scarce or limited resources. In this system everyone was entitled to a share of what was produced from the soil or taken from the sea. (RE3)

Over the centuries, the Islands weren’t unified under single rule. Leadership sometimes covered portions of an island, sometimes covered a whole island or groups of islands. Island rulers, Aliʻi or Mōʻī, typically ascended to power through warfare and familial succession.

At the period of Captain Cook’s arrival (1778-1779), the Hawaiian Islands were divided into four kingdoms: (1) the island of Hawaiʻi under the rule of Kalaniʻōpuʻu, who also had possession of the Hāna district of east Maui; (2) Maui (except the Hāna district,) Molokaʻi, Lānaʻi and Kahoʻolawe, ruled by Kahekili; (3) Oʻahu, under the rule of Kahahana; and at (4) Kauaʻi and Niʻihau, Kamakahelei was ruler.

There were family connections of these four to Kamehameha; the death of Kiwalaʻo; the “Four Kona Uncles” (Keʻeaumoku, Keaweaheulu, Kameʻeiamoku and Kamanawa (the last two are twins and are depicted on the Hawaiian Coat of Arms;)) permission from Kalola to marry her granddaughter (after the defeat of Maui) and how Kamehameha secured his “unification” by “sharing the spoils” of the conquests and “braided the bloodlines;” eventually leading to the agreement with Kaumualiʻi. (Yardley)

In Hawaiʻi, as in other parts of the world, control of the ʻāina has long been recognized as the basis for sovereignty. This was especially true in traditional Hawaiian society before Kamehameha united the islands. At that time, the ultimate control of all ʻāina was vested in the mō’ī of each island, as he or she was the paramount Chief. (Kameʻeleihiwa)

Control of ʻāina is not the same as ownership of ʻāina, in the Western capitalist sense. In traditional Hawaiian society, ʻāina was given from one person to another, but was never bought or sold.

If in Hawaiian metaphor, all ʻāina and products of the ʻāina – in fact life itself – proceed from the Akua, then “ownership” of the ʻāina and all wealth emanating from the ʻāina rightfully belong to those Akua from whom they proceed. (Kameʻeleihiwa)

Kālaiʻāina (the carving/distribution of land) by the mōʻī was practiced not only upon conquest, but traditionally at the peaceful ascension of a new mōʻī. (Klieger)

After selecting lands for himself, the King allotted the remaining to the warrior Chiefs who rendered assistance in his conquest. These warrior Chiefs, after retaining a portion for themselves, reallotted the remaining lands to their followers and supporters.

However, no one owned the land and at death a parcel or unit was returned to the overseer for redistribution. Essentially, the king could distribute land to anyone he wanted if he so chose. (RE3)

The distribution of lands was all on a revocable basis. What the superior gave, he was able to take away at his pleasure. This ancient tenure was in nature feudal, although the tenants were not serfs tied to the soil – they were allowed to move freely from the land of one Chief to that of another.

A process for formal individual “ownership” of the land followed a transition over the years. In 1839 the Bill of Rights of the Hawaiian Islands was enacted which guaranteed that people’s lands would not be taken from them.

In 1840, the first Constitution of Hawai`i was enacted. This constitution made it clear that people had an interest in land greater than that of the bounty and produce of the land.

In 1845, the Land Commission was created in Hawaiʻi by Kamehameha III to award land claims. Then, in 1848, the Māhele (land division) occurred with the King and 245 aliʻi and konohiki came together to divide the land.

Each māhele was in effect a quitclaim agreement between the King and a Chief or Konohiki with reference to the lands in which they both claimed interests. For the lands set aside for the Chief or Konohiki, the King signed an agreement: “I hereby agree that this division is good. The lands above written are for (name of Chief or Konohiki); consent is given to take it before the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles.”

The Māhele itself did not convey title to land. The high Chiefs and the lesser Konohiki were required to present their claims before the Land Commission to receive awards for the lands. With an award, the person was still required to pay commutation to the government, in cash or by surrender of equally valuable lands (set at one third of the value of the unimproved land.)

In the Māhele of 1848, of the approximate 10,000 awards, around 1,000,000-acres were reserved by King Kamehameha III as “Crown” lands, 1,500,000-acres were given by the King (as “Government” lands) to the ‘government and people’, approximately 1,500,000-acres were set aside for the Chiefs (as “Konohiki” lands) and less than 30,000-acres of land were awarded to the native tenants (Kuleana lands.)