Kauhale

December 30, 2017 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Hale Mua

Fishing, the making of fishing gear and canoes, the care and housing of canoes and fishing gear, fighting, and the making of weapons were essentially men’s activities (although there are accounts of famous women warriors).

Every aspect of taro economy and culture was man’s work; the making and tending of fields and irrigated terraces and irrigation ditches, planting, cultivating and harvesting taro, steaming it in the ground oven, peeling it, and pounding the steamed corms to make poi for the womenfolk, as well as for men and boys.

The erection of every kind of house and shed was man’s work. For most family rituals the male head of the family functioned as family priest, just as in the greater rituals of community and state the professional priests were men. (Handy & Pukui)

Kauhale means homestead, and when there were a number of kauhale close together the same term was used. The old Hawaiians had no conception of village or town as a corporate social entity; there was no term for village.

The kauhale were scattered near streams in valley bottoms; each family kauhale was right beside its lo’i. A spring (or springs) was sometimes the reason for a village-like conglomeration of homesteads – again, families focused on the water source.

Traditional hale (‘house’, ‘building’) were constructed of native woods lashed together with cordage most often made from olonā. Pili grass was a preferred thatching that added a pleasant odor to a new hale. Lauhala (pandanus leaves) or ti leaf bundles called peʻa were other covering materials used.

Unlike our housing today, the single ‘hale’ was not necessarily the ‘home.’ The traditional Hawaiian home was the kauhale (Lit., plural house;) this was a group of structures forming the living compound – homestead – with each building serving a specific purpose.

The main structure within the kauhale household complex was the common house, or hale noa, in which all the family members slept at night. It was the largest building within a family compound and the most weatherproof. (Loubser)

Other structures included hale mua (men’s meeting/eating house,) hale ʻāina (women’s eating house,) hale peʻa (menstruation house) and other needed structures (those for canoe makers, others used to house fishing gear, etc.)

The terrain and the subsistence lifestyle and economy created the dispersed community of scattered homesteads. Typically, a Hawaiian family’s homestead stood in relative isolation.

‘At the age of 3 or 4, (a high ranking male child) was placed in the mua and his eating made kapu (or taboo) …’ Non-elite male children were also consecrated in hale mua after birth. (Dixon)

Archaeological investigations conducted on hale mua have identified evidence of presumed male food consumption (bones from pig and some large pelagic fish, species taboo to women) and male domestic activities (stone tool making).

The daily implementation of the kapu in non-elite Hawaiian family life was presumably more complex, as were gender specific activities such as tool making. (Dixon) Near it was the imu or oven in which the men cooked their food.

The mua or menʻs eating house was a sacred place from which women were excluded. It was the place where the men and older boys ate their meals and where the head of the family offered the daily offerings of ʻawa to the family ʻaumakua. Here men and family gods ate together; women, were not allowed to enter here.

The daily offering was never omitted and if the head of the family was unable to perform his duty, he appointed some one to do it. The prayers were for the welfare of the ruling chief and for the family itself.

When a serious problem arose, such as a new venture to be attempted or sickness in the family, the head of the family slept in the Mua, where the family gods would give him directions as to what to do.

Thus the Mua served both as a place for the men to eat and a meeting place with the family gods. At one end of the mua was an altar (kuahu) dedicated to the family ʻaumakua whose effigies stood there.

Here the head of the household prayed and performed necessary rites sometimes without, sometimes with the aid of a kahuna pule, when came the time for the rites of the life cycle such as birth, cutting the foreskin, sickness and death. (Handy & Pukui)

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook

Follow Peter T Young on Google+

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

Hale_Mua-Pili-Black

June 12, 2016 by Peter T Young 2 Comments

Loyalty to Locality

Using stratigraphic archaeology and refinements in radiocarbon dating, studies suggest it was about 900-1000 AD that “Polynesian explorers first made their remarkable voyage from central Eastern Polynesia Islands, across the doldrums and into the North Pacific, to discover Hawai‘i.” (Kirch)

The motivations of the voyagers varied. Some left to explore the world or to seek adventure. Others departed to find new land or new resources because of growing populations or prolonged droughts and other ecological disasters in their homelands. (PVS)

Early settlement patterns in the Islands put people on the windward sides of the islands, typically along the shoreline. Settlement patterns tended to be dispersed and without major population centers.

Most of the makaʻāinana (common people) were farmers, a few were fishermen. Tenants cultivated smaller crops for family consumption, to supply the needs of chiefs and provide tributes.

Fishermen and their families living around the bays and the beaches, or at isolated localities along the coast where fishing was practicable, led a life that was materially simpler than that of planters who dwelt on the plains.

There was no term for village. The typical homestead or kauhale consisted of the sleeping or common house, the men’s house, women’s eating house, and storehouse, and generally stood in relative isolation in dispersed communities.

The terrain and the subsistence economy naturally created the dispersed community of scattered homesteads. It was only when topography or the physical character of an area required close proximity of homes that villages existed.

Where conglomerations of homesteads existed, they were not communities held together either by bonds of kinship or economic interdependence.

A spring (or springs) was sometimes the reason for a village-like conglomeration of homesteads. “But it is along and in the streams which rush through the bottoms of these narrow gorges that the Hawaiian is most at home.”

“Go into any of these valleys, and you will see a surprising sight : along the whole narrow bottom, and climbing often in terraces the steep hillsides, you will see the little taro patches, skillfully laid so as to catch the water, either directly from the main stream, or from canals taking water out above.” (Nordhoff, 1874)

The true community in which sundry homesteads were integrated by socio-religious and economic ties was the dispersed community of ʻohana. This word signifies relatives by blood, marriage, and adoption.

In the course of native settlement, as the early Hawaiians spread from fishing sites on the shore to inland areas and fanned out over the plains and hills from original centers of settlement, households with ties of relationship became scattered.

Some located on upland slopes (ko kula uka,) some on the plains toward the sea (ko kula kai,) and some along the shore (ko kaha kai.) Neighborly interdependence, the sharing of goods and services, naturally resulted in the settling of contiguous lands by a given ʻohana rather than in a scattering over an entire district.

In this way there came to be an association of particular ʻohana with the land units later designated as ahupua‘a. Within a given ahupua‘a the heads of the respective ʻohana were responsible for seeing that their people met the tax levy prescribed by the konohiki, the ali‘i’s land supervisor.

The heads of the ʻohana groups were called haku or haku ‘āina. So far as is known there was no formal procedure involved in the choice of a haku for an ʻohana.

He came by his responsibility through seniority and competence. His authority was a matter of common consent rather than formal sanction; he was not appointed, he was not elected.

There was a high degree of stability or permanence of tenure despite the general turnover of authority and titles to the land whenever a new aliʻi came into power, owing to the fact that particular ʻohana enjoyed the rights of occupancy and use and faithfully fulfilled their obligations.

In many cases their ancestors had pioneered the area and cultivated it since the earliest era of Hawaiian settlement. Actually it was to the advantage of an aliʻi to maintain the occupancy of diligent cultivators of the land.

Thus the kauhale, the homesites of established ʻohana, were permanent features of the landscape, and the vested interest of any given family was equivalent to a title of ownership, so long as the landsman labored diligently to sustain his claim and was loyal to his aliʻi.

People identify themselves not just with the chiefdom (moku,) but with the ahupua‘a which was their homeland. This was true throughout the Hawaiian Islands.

This loyalty to locality, the identification of persons with family or ʻohana and with the ‘āina that nourished the ʻohana is an attitude that was ingrained. (The information here is from Handy & Handy with Pukui.)

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook

Follow Peter T Young on Google+

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

Kauhale-Hale Pili-DMY

Pre-contact Footprint-Hawaiian Islands-GoogleEarth-OHA-TNC

Pre-contact Footprint-Kauai-Niihau-GoogleEarth-OHA-TNC

Pre-contact Footprint-Oahu-GoogleEarth-OHA-TNC

Pre-contact Footprint-Maui Nui-GoogleEarth-OHA-TNC

Pre-contact Footprint-Hawaii Island-GoogleEarth-OHA-TNC

July 21, 2014 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

ʻĀina is compounded from the verb “ʻai” (to eat,) referring specifically to vegetable foods, with the substantive suffix “na,” which makes it a noun. The word ʻāina (land,) then, means “that which feeds.”

In old Hawaiʻi’s 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, as well as across regions on each island.

The terrain and the subsistence lifestyle and economy created the dispersed community of scattered homesteads. Typically a Hawaiian family’s homestead stood in relative isolation.

Where homesteads were assembled near each other, they were not communities held together either by bonds of kinship or economic interdependence.

“Go into any of these valleys, and you will see a surprising sight: along the whole narrow bottom, and climbing often in terraces the steep hillsides, you will see the little taro patches, skillfully laid so as to catch the water, either directly from the main stream, or from canals taking water out above.”

“Nearby or among these small holdings stand the grass houses of the proprietors, and you may see them and their wives, their clothing tucked up, standing over their knees in water, planting or cultivating their crop.” (Nordhoff, 1875)

Fishermen and their families living around the bays and beaches, or at isolated localities along the coast where fishing was practicable, led a life that was materially simpler than that of planters who dwelt on the plains.

Placement and occasional collection of kauhale was more of a functional pattern.

Small bays and beaches generally had a cluster of houses where the families of fishermen lived – it was primarily because of the proximity to access to the ocean.

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.

Because each ʻohana (family) was served by a parental haku (master, overseer) and each family was self-sufficient and capable of satisfying its own needs, there was no need for a hierarchal structure.

The Hawaiian concept of family, ‘ʻohana, is derived from the word ʻohā (fig., offspring, youngsters,) the axillary shoots of kalo that sprout from the main corm, the makua (parent.) Huli, cut from the tops of mauka, and ‘ohā are then used for replanting to regenerate the cycle of kalo production.

The true ‘community’ in which homesteads were integrated by socio-religious and economic ties was the dispersed community of the family (ʻohana,) relatives by blood, marriage and adoption.

Neighborly interdependence, the sharing of goods and services, resulted in the settling of contiguous lands by a given ʻohana within an ahupuaʻa (rather than in a scattering over an entire district.)

Kamakau states that there were no chiefs in the earliest period of settlement but that they came “several hundred years afterward … when men became numerous.”

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.

As chiefdoms developed, the simple pecking order of titles and status likely evolved into a more complex and stratified structure.

While conquest and war resulted in periodic changes in leadership, there was a relative stability and permanence for the families and their kauhale. As a practical matter it was to the benefit of the chiefs to keep the farmers and fishers on the land they knew and cultivated.

Thus, the kauhale, the homesites of established ʻohana, were permanent features of the landscape, and the vested interest of any given family was equivalent to a title of ownership, so long as the landsman labored diligently to sustain his claim and was loyal to his chief. (Lots of information here from Handy and Pukui.)

The image shows a drawing of a kauhale – homestead. In addition, I have added other images in a folder of like name in the Photos section on my Facebook and Google+ pages.

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook

Follow Peter T Young on Google+

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn

July 29, 2013 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Hale Pili

Traditional dwellings (hale pili) were constructed of native woods lashed together with cordage most often made from olonā. Pili grass was a preferred thatching that added a pleasant odor to a new hale. Lauhala (pandanus leaves) or ti leaf bundles called pe‘a, were other covering materials used.

There were many loina (rules) associated with the construction of hale. The kahuna ku‘iku‘i puʻuone, priest who chose the location for a hale, had the final word on the important decision of site selection. The building of a new house was marked with ritual and a feast of dedication. (Bishop Museum)

The “birthing” ceremony of a new dwelling centered around the doorway of the house with the cutting of the piko (center, symbolizing the umbilical cord) of the house and offerings of fish. The kahuna o Lono recited a Pule Ho‘ola‘a Hale (House Dedication Prayer). (Bishop Museum)

During a tour of the Island of Hawaiʻi in 1823, missionary William Ellis noted the following, “The houses of the natives whom he had visited today, like most in this part of the island [Hilo district], where the pandanus is abundant, were covered with the leaves of this plant, which, though it requires more labour in thatching, makes the most durable dwellings.”

There is also less variety in the form of the Sandwich Island dwellings, which are chiefly of two kinds, viz., the kale noho (dwelling house), or halau (a long building) nearly open at one end, and, though thatched with different materials, they are all framed in nearly the same way.” (Ellis)

“The size and quality of a dwelling varies according to the rank and means of its possessor, those of the poor people being mere huts, eight or ten feet square, others twenty feet long, and ten or twelve feet wide, while the houses of the chiefs are from forty to seventy feet long. (Ellis)

Unlike our housing today, the single ‘hale’ was not necessarily the ‘home.’ The traditional Hawaiian home was the kauhale (Lit., plural house;) this was a group of houses forming the homestead – spatially separated – each serving a specific purpose, but paired male and female activity areas.

“Their houses are generally separate from each other: even in their most populous villages, however near the houses may be, they are always distinct buildings.” (Ellis)

A kauhale could consist of a cluster of dwellings in the mid-elevations for cultivating food, another cluster of dwellings on the shoreline for fishing, and perhaps even more higher up on the volcanic slopes for hunting and harvesting wood products.

For the fairly well-to-do family, these consisted of hale noa (house free from kapu) where all slept together, hale mua (men’s meeting/eating house, hale aina (women’s eating house,) hale pe‘a (menstruation house) and other needed dwellings (those for canoe makers and others used to house fishing gear.)

The two basic functional units were the common house or hale noa and the mua. Apparently, only a few households ever exhibited the full complement of structures, although sleeping and cook houses were present within most household complexes. (Handy & Pukui)

The house in which the men ate was called the mua; the sanctuary where they worshipped was called heiau, and it was a very tabu place. The house in which the women ate was called the hale aina. These houses were the ones to which the restrictions and tabu applied, but in the common dwelling house, hale noa, the man and his wife met freely together. (Malo)

In most cases, the hale noa was mauka of the hale mua. Where this is not the case, the hale noa is nonetheless still on higher ground than the hale mua. This mauka-makai or high ground-low ground opposition might be significant in terms of the traditional Hawaiian divisions of space along gender lines. (Loubser)

This arrangement, under the kapu system, was very burdensome on the husband and wife. For instance, the husband was burdened and wearied with the preparation of two ovens of food, one for himself and a separate one for his wife. (Malo)

He would first prepare an oven of food for his wife, and, when that was done, he went to the house mua and started an oven of food for himself. He’s return to the wife’s oven peel the taro, pound it into poi, knead it and put it into the calabash for his wife. Then he’d return to do the same for himself. (Malo)

A huge change that came with the end of the kapu system (in 1819) was the mixing of the previously separate places for eating and sleeping. The book Native Planters describes:
“The simplicity and orderliness of the hale noa, and with them the sound, normal living of families, were destroyed when the kapu requiring men and women to eat separately was abolished. This meant that food was brought into the living quarters. What had been a clean and neat sanctum for man and wife and their offspring became a free-for-all gathering place for all ages of both sexes.” (Handy & Pukui)

“The house was esteemed a possession of great value. It was the place where husband and wife slept, where their children and friends met, where the household goods of all sorts were stored.” (Malo)

“To act justly without trespassing or deceiving, not frequenting another’s house, not gazing wistfully upon your neighbor’s goods nor begging for anything that belongs to him – that is the prudent course.” (Malo)

The image shows the hale pili of Keʻelikōlani (Princess Ruth) on the grounds of Huliheʻe Palace in Kona (the style of house she preferred over the modern version nearby;) this is where she died on May 24, 1883. In addition, I have added other related images in a folder of like name in the Photos section on my Facebook and Google+ pages.

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook

Follow Peter T Young on Google+