Hawaii | Page 104 | Images of Old Hawaiʻi

March 6, 2024 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

March 6, 1899

“It has been a strange life, really, and a very romantic one.”

On October 16, 1875, a child was born to Princess Miriam Likelike (the youngest sister of King Kalākaua) and Archibald Cleghorn. The child, the only direct descendant of the Kalākaua dynasty, was named Victoria Kawekiu Kaʻiulani Lunalilo Kalaninui Ahilapalapa.

On March 9, 1891, Princess Victoria Kaʻiulani Cleghorn was duly appointed and proclaimed heir apparent to the Hawaiian throne.

Kaʻiulani inherited 10-acres of land in Waikīkī from her godmother, Princess Ruth Keʻelikōlani. Originally called Auaukai, Princess Likelike (Kaʻiulani’s mother) named it ʻĀinahau; Princess Kaʻiulani spent most of her life there.

The stream that flowed through ʻĀinahau and emptied into the ocean between the Moana and Royal Hawaiian Hotels (where the present Outrigger Hotel is located,) was called ʻApuakehau (the middle of three rivers that used to run through Waikīkī.)

The family built a two-story home on the estate. At first the home was used only as a country estate, but Princess Kaʻiulani’s family loved it so much, it soon became their full time residence.

Sadly, Kaʻiulani died, March 6, 1899.

The New York Times obituary (March 18, 1899) read, “Princess Kaʻiulani died March 6 of inflammatory rheumatism contracted several weeks ago while of a visit to the Island of Hawaii.”

“The funeral of the Princess will occur on Sunday, March 12, from the old native church (Kawaiahaʻo,) and will be under the direction for the Government. The ceremonies will be on a scale befitting the rank of the young Princess.”

“The body is lying in state at ʻĀinahau, the Princess’s old home. Thousands of persons, both native and white, have gone out to the place, and the whole town is in mourning. Flags on the Government buildings are at half mast, as are those on the residences of the foreign Consuls.”

Kaʻiulani had gone to the Waimea on the Big Island to visit Helen and Eva Parker, daughters of Samuel “Kamuela” Parker (1853–1920,) grandson of John Parker (founder of the Parker Ranch.) (When his grandfather died, in 1868, Samuel (at the age of 15) inherited half the Parker Ranch, with his uncle John Palmer Parker II (1827–1891) inheriting the other half.)

While attending a wedding at the ranch, Princess Kaʻiulani and the girls had gone out riding horseback on Parker Ranch; they encountered a rainstorm. Kaʻiulani became ill; she and her family returned to O‘ahu.

Tragically, after a two-month illness, Kaʻiulani died at ʻĀinahau, at age 23.

Kaʻiulani became a friend of author Robert Louis Stevenson. He had come to Hawaiʻi due to ill health. In his writings, Robert Louis Stevenson endearingly recalled that Princess Victoria Kaʻiulani was “…more beautiful than the fairest flower.”

He was a frequent guest and used to read passages of poetry to the young Princess under the banyan tree. Reportedly, the first banyan tree in Hawaiʻi was planted on the grounds of ʻĀinahau.

As many as fifty peacocks, favorites of the young Princess, were allowed to roam freely on the grounds.

Prior to her departure to study abroad, Stevenson wrote a farewell poem to the princess in her autograph book:

“Forth from her land to mine she goes,
The Island maid, the Island rose;
Light of heart and bright of face:
The daughter of a double race.

Her islands here, in Southern sun,
Shall mourn their Kaʻiulani gone,
And I, in her dear banyan shade,
Look vainly for my little maid.

But our Scots islands far away
Shall glitter with unwonted day,
And cast for once their tempests by
To smile in Kaʻiulani’s eye.”

A notation in Stevenson’s poem book further noted, “Written in April in the April of her age; and at Waikīkī, within easy walk of Kaʻiulani’s banyan!”

“When she comes to my land and her father’s, and the rain beats upon the window (as I fear it will,) let her look at this page; it will be like a weed gathered and pressed at home; and she will remember her own islands, and the shadow of the mighty tree …”

“… and she will hear the peacocks screaming in the dusk and the wind blowing in the palms; and she will think of her father sitting there alone.”

It is said that the night Kaʻiulani died, her peacocks screamed so loud that people could hear them miles away and knew that she had died.

Kaiulani_in_1897_(PPWD-15-3.016)

Princess Kaiulani at approximately 6 years old, standing, framed by window-1881-600

Kaiulani_and_father_at_Ainahau_in_1889-WC

Princess_Kaiulani-1889-S00016

Kaiulani-age-11-HSA

Kaiulani_at_Ainahau_1898

Ainahau_-_Kaiulani’s_House-after-1897

Entrance_to_Ainahau,_near_Honolulu,_residence_of_Princess_Kaiulani-1901-600

March 5, 2024 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

The “Japanese Problem”

Race, Ethnicity, Nationality, Culture, Heritage, Identity … some have suggested that about 100-years ago, folks used “racial” referring more specifically to nationality rather than ethnicity. In other words, the concern then was that a foreign nation was gradually supplanting parts of another.

Never-the-less, at the time, folks were concerned with the growing numbers of foreign nationals, especially Japanese; racial conflicts were developing and the military feared Japanese expansion. Growing immigrant population, including those from Japan started to concern some in the Islands, as well as on the continent.

In response, the Commission of Relations with Japan, appointed by the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America retained Professor HA Millis of the University of Kansas who authored the “Japanese Problem in the United States” (1915.)

He “believe(d) in restriction in numbers and in keeping the laborers from immigrating to this country. But once here, the Japanese should not be discriminated against.” (Millis; New York Times)

However, a later incident in Hawaiʻi (1920) is viewed as a catalyst to actions that resulted in The Japanese Exclusion Act to address what were real, as well as imagined conceptions, misconceptions and opinions.

But we are getting ahead of ourselves; let’s look back.

The early Polynesian settlers to Hawaiʻi brought sugar cane with them and demonstrated that it could be grown successfully.

Since it was a crop that produced a choice food product that could be shipped to distant markets, its culture on a field and commercial scale was started as early as 1800 and it continued to grow.

The first commercially-viable sugar plantation, Ladd and Company, was started at Kōloa on Kaua‘i. On July 29, 1835, Ladd obtained a 50-year lease on nearly 1,000-acres of land and established a plantation and mill site in Kōloa.

It was to change the face of Hawai‘i forever, launching an entire economy, lifestyle and practice of monocropping that lasted for over a century. Sugar gradually replaced sandalwood and whaling in the mid-19th century and became the principal industry in the Islands.

Sugar was the dominant economic force in Hawaiʻi for over a century, other plantations soon followed Kōloa. A century after Captain James Cook’s arrival in Hawaiʻi, sugar plantations started to dominate the landscape.

Hawai‘i’s economy turned toward sugar in the decades between 1860 and 1880; these twenty years were pivotal in building the plantation system. By 1883, more than 50-plantations were producing sugar on five islands.

A shortage of laborers to work in the growing (in size and number) sugar plantations became a challenge; the answer was imported labor. Starting in the 1850s, when the Hawaiian Legislature passed “An Act for the Governance of Masters and Servants” (providing the legal basis for contract-labor system,) labor shortages were eased by bringing in contract workers from Asia, Europe and North America.

The first to arrive were the Chinese (1852.) Between 1852 and 1884, the population of Chinese in Hawaiʻi increased from 364 to 18,254, to become almost a quarter of the population of the Kingdom. The US Chinese Exclusion Law of 1882 (effective in Hawaiʻi in 1902) closed further immigration of persons of Chinese ancestry to Hawai’i, except for the few individuals who could qualify for an exempt status.

In 1868, approximately 150-Japanese came to Hawaiʻi to work on sugar plantations and another 40 to Guam. This unauthorized recruitment and shipment of laborers, known as the gannenmono (“first year men”,) marked the beginning of Japanese labor migration overseas. (JANM)

In March 1881, King Kalākaua visited Japan during which he discussed with Emperor Meiji Hawaiʻi’s desire to encourage Japanese nationals to settle in Hawaiʻi; this improved the relationship of the Hawaiian Kingdom with the Japanese government. (Nordyke/Matsumoto)

The first 943-government-sponsored, Kanyaku Imin, Japanese immigrants to Hawaiʻi arrived in Honolulu on February 8, 1885. Subsequent government approval was given for a second set of 930-immigrants who arrived in Hawaii on June 17, 1885. More followed.

In 1919, in commemoration of the coronation of Emperor Yoshihito (and a sign of good Japanese-Hawaiian relations,) Japanese in Hawaiʻi offered to construct a modified duplicate of the fountain in Hibiya Park Tokyo in Kapiʻolani Park.

The official presentation of the “Phoenix Fountain” was conducted by Consul General Moroi who announced the fountain was a “testimonial of friendship and equality of the Japanese residing in the Hawaiian Islands.”

One Japanese speaker noted, “We are assembled here to mark a spot of everlasting importance in the annals of the history of the Japanese people of Hawaiʻi.” (It was later replaced and is now known as the Louise Dillingham Memorial Fountain.

But discord was imminent.

Growing immigrant population, including those from Japan, started to concern some, in the Islands, as well as on the continent. Many Americans had begun to look at Japan and the Japanese with deep suspicion.

In 1920, demanding increases in pay, Japanese sugar workers on Oʻahu struck the plantations – approximately 6,000 workers, over three quarters of the labor force, walked off the job (only Oʻahu workers walked off, they relied on neighbor island for support.)

Though the strike was on Oʻahu, its impact was felt across the Islands.

At about this time, Olaʻa Sugar Company was established in Puna on the Island of Hawaiʻi; Juzaburo Sakamaki was hired as the company’s only regular interpreter.

As interpreter, Sakamaki was the only pipeline between the company and the Japanese immigrants who made up the majority of the labor force at Olaʻa Plantation. Sakamaki had sided with management during the labor dispute.

Then, a small item in the June 4, 1920 Honolulu Star Bulletin noted, “The home of a Japanese eight miles from Olaa was blown up with giant powder last night.” The newspaper did not give the name of the victim, but it reported that the man was in a back bedroom at the time and was not killed, even though the front of the house was destroyed. (UC Press)

It turns out the attack was on Sakamaki’s home.

The Territory of Hawaiʻi charged leaders of the Federation of Japanese Labor with conspiracy to assassinate Sakamaki in order to intimidate opponents of the strike and alleged, further, that the strike was part of a concerted effort to take over the Islands by Japan.

It took the jury less than five hours to reach a verdict on the fifteen defendants. Judge Banks then sentenced all the defendants to “be imprisoned in Oʻahu prison at hard labor for the term of not less than four years nor more than ten years.” (UC Press)

Some suggest it was the catalyst for legislation restricting immigration into the US.

On December 5, 1923, Rep. Albert Johnson, chairman of the House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, had submitted to the House a new immigration quota bill. Having heard about the “Japanese conspiracy” over and over from Hawaiian representatives, Johnson finally decided to propose a new law prohibiting the immigration of all Asians.

The subsequent Johnson Reed Immigration Quota Act ((Immigration Act of 1924) limited the annual number of immigrants who could be admitted from any country to 2% of the number of people from that country who were already living in the United States in 1890 (down from the 3% cap set by the Immigration Restriction Act of 1921.)) It passed both houses of Congress with overwhelming majorities: in the House 308 to 58 and in the Senate 69 to 9.

I am reminded of the simple question, “Can we, can we all get along … can we, can we get along?” (Rodney King)

March 4, 2024 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Kūpeʻe Niho ʻIlio

“The hula was a religious service, in which poetry, music, pantomime, and the dance lent themselves, under the forms of dramatic art, to the refreshment of men’s minds.”

“Its view of life was idyllic, and it gave itself to the celebration of those mythical times when gods and goddesses moved on the earth as men and women and when men and women were as gods.”

“As to subject-matter, its warp was spun largely from the bowels of the old-time mythology into cords through which the race maintained vital connection with its mysterious past.”

“The people were superstitiously religious; one finds their drama saturated with religious feeling; hedged about with tabu, loaded down with prayer and sacrifice. “

“They were poetical; nature was full of voices for their ears; their thoughts came to them as images; nature was to them an allegory; all this found expression in their dramatic art.”

“The ancient Hawaiians did not personally and informally indulge in the dance for their own amusement, as does pleasure loving society at the present time.”

“We are wont to think of the old-time Hawaiians as light-hearted children of nature, given to spontaneous outbursts of song and dance as the mood seized them …”

“… quite as the rustics of ‘merrie England’ joined hands and tripped ‘the light fantastic toe’ in the joyous month of May or shouted the harvest home at a later season. “

“The genius of the Hawaiian was different.”

“With him the dance was an affair of premeditation, an organized effort, guarded by the traditions of a somber religion. And this characteristic, with qualifications, will be found to belong to popular Hawaiian sport and amusement of every variety.” (Nathaniel Bright Emerson.)

The costume of the hula dancer was much the same for both sexes, its chief article a simple short skirt about the waist, the pa-u. When the time has come for a dance, the halau becomes one common dressing room. At a signal from the kumu the work begins. The putting on of each article of costume is accompanied by a special song.

First come the ku-pe‘e, anklets of whale teeth, bone, shell-work, dog-teeth, fiber-stuffs, and what not. While all stoop in unison they chant the song of the anklet:

Aala kupukupu ka uka o Kane-hoa.
E ho-a!
Hoa na llma o ka makani, he Wai-kaloa
He Wai-kaloa ka makanl anu Lihue.
Alina lehua i kau ka opua
Ku’u pua,
Ku’u pua i‘ini e ku-i a lei.
Ina ia oe ke lei ‘a mai ia.

Fragrant the grasses of high Kane-hoa.
Bind on the anklets, bind!
Bind with finger deft as the wind
That cools the air of this bower.
Lehua bloom pales at my flower,
O sweetheart of mine,
Bud that I’d pluck and wear in my wreath,
If thou wert but a flower!
(Anklet Song, Emerson)

“In times long past anklets made from hundreds of dog teeth which, strung on a foundation of olona netting in much the same manner as feathers were woven into the fabric of a fiber mesh to make the famous feather capes, were worn in the hula to accentuate the rhythms of the feet in dancing. They were called kupee niho ilio, dog tooth bracelets.” (Roberts)

’The canine teeth of dogs (’ilio) with holes drilled through the root and strung on a cord have been regarded as dog-tooth necklaces (lei ’ilio).’

‘They may have been used temporarily as such, but it is more likely that they were so strung until a sufficient number had been collected to make the dog-tooth leg ornament characteristic of Hawaii.’

’Dogtooth leg ornaments (kupe’e niho ’ilio), worn by men dancers, are peculiar to Hawaii.’ (Buck) They could also be considered instruments, as they underlined the sounds of stamping feet.

March 3, 2024 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Vancouver, Kamehameha and King George III

Captain James Cook set sail on three voyages to the South Seas. His first Pacific voyage (1768-1771) was aboard the Endeavour and began on May 27, 1768. It had three aims; go to Tahiti to record the transit of Venus (when Venus passes between the earth and sun – June 3, 1769;) record natural history, led by 25-year-old Joseph Banks; and search for the Great South Land.

Cook’s second Pacific voyage (1772-1775) aboard Resolution and Adventure aimed to establish whether there was an inhabited southern continent, and make astronomical observations.

Cook’s third and final voyage (1776-1779) of discovery was an attempt to locate a North-West Passage, an ice-free sea route which linked the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean. Cook commanded the Resolution while Charles Clerke commanded Discovery. (State Library, New South Wales)

“Every Fighting Service has, and must have, two main categories – ‘Officers’ and ‘Men.’ The Royal Navy in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries was no exception. The distinction existed: was indeed more than ordinarily marked. It was not only a naval distinction, but a sharp social one too.”

“‘Officers’ as contemporary society used that word, came from one walk of life, ‘Men’ from another: and, as it was not easy in Society to pass from a lower stratum to a higher, so in the Navy, it was not easy for a ‘Man’ to become an Officer. But it was possible.” (Captain Cook Society)

“Cook had chosen his subordinates well or had been lucky. The officers of the third voyage were a remarkably intelligent group of men.” (Captain Cook Society) “All the great remaining voyages of the eighteenth century drew on Cook’s officers.” George Vancouver was one of the seamen and midshipman who had travelled with Cook on his second and third voyages.

In the introduction to Captain George Vancouver’s journals of his voyage to the Pacific, his brother John wrote, “that from the age of thirteen, his whole life to the commencement of this expedition, (to the Pacific) has been devoted to constant employment in His Majesty’s naval service.”

In 1791, Vancouver later entered the Pacific a dozen years later in command of the second British exploring expedition. (HJH) Vancouver visited Hawaiʻi three times, in 1792, 1793 and 1794.

On the first trip, Vancouver’s ships “Discovery” and “Chatham” first rounded the Cape of Good Hope, South Africa, and traveled to Tahiti, via Australia and New Zealand, and then sailed north to the Hawaiian Islands.

On his second trip in February 1793, the “Discovery” and “Chatham” first circled and surveyed the Island Hawaiʻi. From a meeting he had with Kamehameha, he noted in his Journal,

“About noon I was honored with the presence of Tamaahmaah, the king of Owhyhee, [Kamehameha .. . of Hawai‘i] whose approach had been announced sometime before his arrival.”

“Not only from Captain King’s [of the Cook expedition] description, but also from my own memory, as far as it would serve me, I expected to have recognized my former acquaintance by the most savage countenance we had hitherto seen amongst these people …”

“but I was agreeably surprized in finding that his riper years had softened that stern ferocity which his younger days had exhibited, and had changed his general deportment to an address characteristic of an open, cheerful, and sensible mind; combined with great generosity, and goodness of disposition. …”

“Tamaahtnaah came on board in a very large canoe, accompanied by John Young, an English seaman, who appeared to be not only a great favourite, but to possess no small degree of influence with this great chief. …”

“After the usual ceremonies and assurances of friendship had passed between Tamaahmaah and myself, he said that his queen [Ka‘ahumanu] with several of his friends and relations were in the canoe alongside, and requested they might be admitted on board. This was instantly granted, and I was introduced to her majesty. …”

“She appeared to be about sixteen, and undoubtedly did credit to the choice and taste of Tamaahmaah, being one of the finest women we had yet seen on any of the islands. It was pleasing to observe the kindness and fond attention, with which on all occasions they seemed to regard each other. …”

“I was much pleased with the decorum and general conduct of this royal party. Though it consisted of many, yet not one solicited even the most inconsiderable article; nor did they appear to have any expectation of receiving presents.”

“They seemed to be particularly cautious to avoid giving the least cause for offence; but no one more so than the king himself, who was so scrupulous, as to enquire when and where it was proper for him to be seated.”

“The inhabitants, who had assembled round the ships, were by this time very numerous; on being denied their requests to be admitted on board, which was observed towards all but the principal chiefs, they remained perfectly quiet in their canoes, and in the most orderly manner carried on an honest and friendly intercourse.” (Vancouver)

When Kamehameha came aboard the ship, taking Vancouver’s hand, he “demanded, if we were sincerely his friends”, to which Vancouver answered in the affirmative. Kamehameha then said “he understood we belonged to King George, and asked if he was likewise his friend.”

“On receiving a satisfactory answer to this question, he declared the he was our firm good friend; and according to the custom of the country, in testimony of the sincerity of our declarations we saluted by touching noses.” (Vancouver, 1798)

In the exchange of gifts, after that, Kamehameha presented four feathered helmets and other items, Vancouver gave Kamehameha the remaining livestock on board, “five cows, two ewes and a ram.”

The farewell between the British and the Hawaiians was emotional, but both understood that Vancouver would be returning the following winter.

Just before Vancouver left Kawaihae on March 9, 1793, he gave Isaac Davis and John Young a letter testifying that “Tamaahaah, with the generality of the Chiefs, and the whole of the lower order of People, have conducted themselves toward us with the strictest honest, civility and friendly attention.” (Speakman, HJH)

Vancouver was obviously very much impressed with Kamehameha. He later met the chiefs of all the islands: Ka‘eo, who governed Maui, Lanai, and Molokai for his half-brother Kahekili; Kalanikupule, who administered O‘ahu; and Kaumuali‘i on Kauai.

Vancouver concluded that Kamehameha was not only the ruler of the island of Hawai‘i but also the most responsible of all the chiefs of the Sandwich Islands. He decided “to pay my principal court to Tamaahmaah, as the king of the whole island, and to treat the other chiefs with a due degree of respect and attention.”

Later (March 3, 1810), Kamehameha wrote to King George III …

“Sir

“Having had no good opportunity of writing to you since Capt. Vancouver left here has been the means of my Silence. Capt. Vancouver Informed me you would send me a small vessel am sorry to say I have not yet received one.”

“Am sorry to hear your being at War with so many powers and I so far off cannot assist you. Should any of the powers which you are at War with molest me I shall expect your protection, and beg you will order your Ships of War & Privateers not to Capture any vessel whilst laying at Anchor in our Harbours, as I would thank you to make ours a neutral port as I have not the means of defence.”

“I am in particular need of some Bunting having no English Colours also some brass Guns to defend the Islands in case of Attack from your Enemies. I have built a few small vessels with an Intent to trade on the North West of America with Tarro root the produce of these Islands for fur skins but am told by the White men here I cannot send them to sea without a Register.”

“In consequence of which beg you will send me a form of a Register & seal with my Name on it. Being very poor at these Islands any thing which you may think useful to me I beg you will send by the earliest opportunity. My best respects to you & your Queen & all your family wishing you Health Happiness & a long prosperous Reign.”

“And am Sir
Your Majesty’s
most devoted Friend & Servant
TAMAAHMAAH
King of the Sandwich Islands”

“PS. My removal from Owyhee to this Island was in consequence of their having put to death Mr. Brown & Mr. Gordon, Masters, (of the Jackall & Prince Le Boo, two of you [sic] merchant vessels.) I have sent by Mr. Jno. Gl Spence Commander of the Ship Duke of Portland, a feather’d cloak & beg your acceptance.”

The letter is dated the day before the Duke of Portland sailed from O‘ahu, and was probably written for Kamehameha by Captain Spence of that vessel, for according to Archibald Campbell, a British seaman who returned home to Britain aboard the Duke of Portland after a year in the Hawaiian Islands, Kamehameha dictated to Captain Spence a letter for King George III. (Hackler)

On April 30, 1812, the Earl of Liverpool, the Foreign Secretary in the British government, replied to Kamehameha’s March 3, 1810 letter to King George III. Due to illness, the King of England had not been able to receive Kamehameha’s letter nor the feather cloak, but they had been presented to his son, who had been appointed Regent. (Hackler)

Liverpool’s letter reads in part: “His Royal Highness Commands Me to assure you that He shall feel at all times most desirous to promote the Welfare of the Sandwich Islands, and that He will give positive Orders to the Commanders of His Ships to treat with proper respect, all Trading Vessels belonging to You, or to Your Subjects.”

“His Royal Highness is confident that the complete Success which He has gained over His Enemies in every Quarter of the Globe, will have the Effect of securing Your Dominions from any Attack, or Molestation on their part.”

“You cannot give a better proof in return of Your Friendship and goodwill towards Great Britain, than by relieving the wants of such British Subjects as may arrive at the Islands over which You Govern and may stand in need of Your assistance. …”

With this letter the Regent sent a number of presents to Kamehameha, including a gold-laced cocked hat and feathers, a new red coat and uniform, two ornamented brass speaking trumpets, and a quantity of nails, brads, hand saws, hammers, hatchets, gimlets, and augers. No arms or seals were included. (Hackler) (Lots of information here is from Hackler.)

March 1, 2024 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Puʻuhonua O Hōnaunau

“The ancient system consisted in the many tabus, restrictions or prohibitions, by which the high chiefs contrived, to throw about their persons a kind of sacredness, and to instil into the minds of the people a superstitious awe and peculiar dread.”

“If the shadow of a common man fell on a chief, it was death; if he put on a kapa or a malo of a chief, it was death; if he went into the chief’s yard, it was death; if he wore the chief’s consecrated mat, it was death; if he went upon the house of the chief, it was death.”

“If a man stood on those occasions when he should prostrate himself, (such as) when the king’s bathing water… (was) carried along, it was death. If a man walked in the shade of the house of a chief with his head besmeared with clay, or with a wreath around it, or with his head wet… it was death.”

“There were many other offenses of the people which were made capital by the chiefs, who magnified and exalted themselves over their subjects.” (Dibble)

The social rules for interaction with gods and members of the chiefly class were legion, and death by human sacrifice was the default punishment in many cases. (Shoenfelder)

Puʻuhonua were locations which, through the power of the gods and the generosity of the chiefs, afforded unconditional absolution to those who broke taboos, disobeyed rulers, or committed other crimes. (Schoenfelder)

Ethno-historical literature, and available physical, cultural, and locational data, note at least 57-sites across the Islands. Puʻuhonua tended to occur in areas of high population and/or in areas frequented by chiefs. (Schoenfelder)

These range from enclosed compounds such as Hōnaunau, to platforms (Halulu on Lānaʻi), to fortified mountain-tops (Kawela on Molokaʻi), to unmodified natural features (Kūkaniloko on Oʻahu) and to entire inhabited land sections, as at Lāhainā on Maui. (Schoenfelder)

Recognized as one of the significant puʻuhonua, and one that is well preserved and presented for the rest of us to understand was Puʻuhonua O Hōnaunau on the Kona coast on the Island of Hawaiʻi.

The Place of Refuge, termed the ‘City of Refuge’ by Rev. William Ellis in 1823, with its adjoining chiefly residences. Beyond the boundaries of the “Palace Grounds”, around the head of Hōnaunau Bay, lived the chiefly retainers and the commoners. South of the Place of Refuge were scattered settlements along the coast and inland under the cliffs of Keanaee. (NPS)

“The Puhonua at Hōnaunau is a very capacious one, capable of containing a vast multitude of people. In time of war, the females, children, and old people of the neighbouring districts, were generally left within it, while the men went to battle. Here they awaited in safety the issue of the conflict, and were secure against surprise and destruction in the event of a defeat.” (Ellis, 1823)

“These Puhonuas were the Hawaiian ‘Cities of Refuge,” and afforded an inviolable sanctuary to the guilty fugitive, who, when flying from the avenging spear, was so favoured as to enter their precincts.” (Ellis, 1823)

“Hither the manslayer, the man who had broken a taboo, or failed in the observance of its rigid requirements, the thief, and even the murderer, fled from his incensed pursuers, and was secure. To whomsoever he belonged, and from whatever part he came, he was equally certain of admittance, though liable to be pursued even to the gates of the enclosure.” (Ellis, 1823)

“Happily for him, those gates were perpetually open. Whenever war was proclaimed, and during the period of actual hostilities, a white flag was unfurled on the top of a tall spear, on the outside, at each end of the enclosure, and until’ the conclusion of peace, waved the symbal of hope to those, who, vanquished in fight, might flee thither for protection.”

“To the spot, on which this banner was unfurled, the victorious warrior might chase his routed foes. But here he must himself fall back. Beyond it he must not advance one step, on pain of forfeiting his life.”

“The priests and their adherents – would immediately put to death anyone, who should have the temerity to follow, or molest those, who were once within the pale of the pahu tabu, and, and as they expressed it, under the shade, or skreening protection, of the spirit of Keave, the tutelar deity of the place.” (Ellis, 1823)

A structure there, Hale-O-Keawe was erected around 1650 to serve as a temple mausoleum for the ruling chiefs of Kona. It served as the major temple for the “Place of Refuge” until 1819, when the religious laws (kapu) were abandoned.

“The appearance of the house was good. Its posts and rafters were of kauila wood, and it was said that this kind of timber was found in the upland of Napu’u. It was well built, with crossed stems of dried ti leaves, for that was the kind of thatching used.”

“The appearance inside and outside of the house was good to look at. The compact bundles of bones (pukuʻi iwi) that were deified (hoʻokuaʻia) were in a row there in the house, beginning with Keawe’s near the right side of the door by which one went in and out, and going to the spot opposite the door (kuʻono).” (John Papa ʻĪʻi)

“It is a compact building, 24 feet by 16, constructed with the most durable timber, and thatched with ti leaves, standing on a bed of lava, which runs out a considerable distance into the sea. It is surrounded by a strong fence, or paling, leaving an area in the front and at each end, about twenty-four feet wide, paved with smooth fragments of lava laid down with considerable skill.”

“Several rudely carved male and female images of wood were placed on the outside of the enclosure; some on low pedestals, under the shade of an adjacent tree; others on high posts, on the jutting rocks that hung over the edge of the water.” (Ellis, 1823)

“The zeal of Kaʻahumanu led her as early as 1829 to visit the Hale O Keawe at Honaunau, a cemetery associated with dark superstitions, and surrounded with horrid wooden images of former generations. The regent visited the place not to mingle her adorations with her early contemporaries and predecessors to the relics of departed mortals, but for the purpose of removing the bones of twenty-four deified kings and princes of the Hawaiian race….” (Bingham)

“… when she saw it ought to be done, she determined it should be done: and in company with Mr. Ruggles and Kapiolani, she went to the sacred deposit, and caused the bones to be placed in large coffins and entombed in a cave in the precipice at the head of Kealakekua Bay.” (Bingham)

The puʻuhonua was deeded to Miriam Kekāuluohi, a granddaughter of Kamehameha I, in the Māhele of 1848, and it was inherited, upon her death, by Levi Haʻalelea, her second husband. In 1866, the property was auctioned by Ha‘alelea’s estate to Charles Kana‘ina, the father of William Charles Lunalilo.

Kana‘ina, however, did not pay the $5,000 bid, and Charles Reed Bishop stepped in to purchase Ha‘alelea’s land for that same amount on April 1, 1867. In 1891, six years after Pauahi’s death, Bishop deeded the land to the trustees of the Bishop Estate who leased it to one of their members, SM Damon.

Damon was responsible for the 1902 restoration work on the Great Wall and the stone platforms of two heiau, Hale O Keawe and ‘Ale‘ale‘a. The County of Hawai‘i took over Damon’s lease in 1921. That lease expired in 1961 when the then County Park was acquired by the US National Park Service. (deSilva)

Originally established in 1955 as City of Refuge National Historical Park, Puʻuhonua O Hōnaunau National Historical Park was renamed on November 10, 1978.

Further reconstruction consisted of four terraces and a passage between the southern end of the platform and the northern end of the Great Wall. In 1966-67 Edmund J Ladd directed the excavation and re-stabilization of the Hale o Keawe platform. Ladd’s excavations in addition to historical accounts indicated that the platform did not originally have multiple tiers; therefore, the 1967 work restored the platform to its more authentic form that joins the Great Wall on its south side.

After the platform was restored, the thatched hale, wooden palisade, and kiʻi were also rebuilt on the site. Since the time of Ladd’s initial reconstruction, the Hale o Keawe structure and carved wooden kiʻi have been replaced on two occasions with the most recent efforts being completed in 2004. (NPS)