Chapter 1 Kahikinui: An Introduction Patrick V. Kirch Despite its status as the second largest island in the Hawaiian archipelago, and a center of ancient Hawaiian culture and home of powerful and famous ruling chiefs such as Kekaulike and Kahekili, the pre-contact history of Maui is little known. Beginning in the late nineteenth-century, extensive tracts of Maui land were converted to sugarcane, and later, to pineapple plantations, forever erasing countless sites and vestiges of ancient Hawaiian life and land use. More recently, sprawling urban and commercial resort developments have likewise irretrievably altered other parts of the island such as Klhei and Ka'anapali. In the less-often visited southeastem part of Maui, however, the vast landscape of Kahikinui remains today much as it looked two hundred years ago, when it was still home to a thriving Native Hawaiian population. True that exotic plants have invaded the uplands, and that cattle grazing has hastened the retreat of the forest to a higher elevation. Yet the groves of wiliwili still display their brilliant orange and yellow- green blossoms each August, and parts of the district retain the best remnant dryland native forest on the island (Medeiros, Loope, and Holt 1986). Moreover, under this mix of exotic and native vegetation, the land of Kahikinui preserves a vast treasure of archaeological sites, the legacy of those generations of Native Hawaiian people who first claimed this land centuries ago, and whose descendants are now reclaiming it under the Kuleana Homestead program of the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. From an archaeological standpoint Kahikinui presents a unique opportunity, for perhaps nowhere else in the Hawaiian Islands today is there an entire traditional moku or district which has its ancient sites wholly intact. (The island of Kaho'olawe is one other region that comes to mind in this regard, but it has suffered extensively from both erosion and from intensive military use and abuse.) Too often, archaeologists must try to infer ancient pattems of life and culture from mere remnants of a highly modified landscape. In Kahikinui, by way of contrast, the entire landscape is available for study, making it 2 Na Mea Kahiko o Kahikinui possible to research such topics as the distribution of heiau within and between ahupua'a, or the broad-scale pattems of traditional agriculture and land use. Over the past several years, three teams of archaeolo- gists have been carrying out archaeological research in Kahikinui, reflecting a unique collaboration between State of Hawai'i personnel and academic researchers from two universities. All three groups are working towards a common goal of recording the rich archaeological legacy of Kahikinui, and of providing the tools with which a history of the land and its people may someday be written. All have also been greatly assisted by Ka 'Ohana 0 Kahikinui, a group which aims to resettle the moku using traditional Hawaiian cultural principles of land use and community organization. It is primarily for the members of Ka 'Ohana 0 Kahikinui that we have written this volume, to share with them our research findings that they may use them in their current efforts. This volume is not meant to be a definitive archaeo- logical study of Kahikinui, for the task of recording the district's sites has only just begun, and many more years of work will be required before a "complete" account will be possible. But some pattems are emerging, and the time seems auspicious for presenting a preliminary account. This Introduc- tion provides background information to the four chapters that follow, each of which presents the preliminary findings of the individual research teams. Kahikinui: An AinaMalo'o The great nineteenth-century Hawaiian scholar David Malo-himself a longtime resident of Maui-noted the fundamental differences between those lands with sufficient water to cultivate kalo (Colocasia esculenta) by means of irrigation, and the "dry lands," the 'aina malo'o (Malo 1951:204). Although dryland cultivation of kalo was possible in such 'dina malo'o, there the sweet potato or 'uala eclipsed the former as the dominant subsistence crop. Consequently, in such 'dina malo'o it was more frequently to the great deity of rainfall and thunder, Lono-one of whose kino lau or earthly "bodies" was the 'uala-that temples were dedicated. Kahikinui was just such an 'dina malo'o, where in Malo's words "farming was a laborious occupation and called for great patience, being attended with many drawbacks" (1951:204). Kahikinui District occupies the southwestem flanks of East Maui, surmounted by the magnificent 3,055 m (10,023 feet) summit of Haleakala, where in Hawaiian tradition the great culture hero Maui snared the sun to slow its path across the heavens (Beckwith 1970:226 passim). Maui is indeed closely associated with the island that bears his name, and he might have fished off the Kahikinui coastline for the "big ulua of Pimoe" (Beckwith 1970:230). The steeply-sloping land surface consists largely of undissected lava flowslopes derived from the southwest rift of Haleakala (termed the Hana Volcanic Series by geologists), dotted in a few places with pyroclastic vents such as the Luala'ilua cinder cones (Stearns and Macdonald 1942; Macdonald and Abbott 1970:318-36). The young age of the Hana lavas is indicated by their lack of weathering, especially the absence of any deep stream dissection. Stream gulches only become prominent towards the eastem edge of Kahikinui, where an older land surface of the Kula Volcanic Series was not buried under the late Pleistocene or Holocene Hana lava flows. The Hana lavas are made up of alkalic olivine basalts, basaltic hawaiites, and ankaramites. Within the intensive Klpapa-Nakaohu survey area, as many as two or three different ankaramite flows are suggested by lithology and degree of surface weathering. These flows vary in terms of aa or pahoehoe morphology, a factor that has influenced the degree of surface weathering, especially in the upland zones. This in tum has implications for whether the pre- contact Hawaiians who used these spaces decided to construct house sites, temples, or other structures in specific localities, or to devote the area to cultivation. Since it is geologically youthful, the landscape has hardly been modified by erosion (Figure 1.1). Most of Kahikinui is traversed only by intermittent, shallow stream channels ranging from 2-8 m in width; scoured and smoothed channel floors and small quantities of waterworn gravel indicate periodic water flow. In our experience, most channel erosion now occurs during occasional kona storms, which can result in several inches of rain falling within less than 24 hours. (Mo Moler of Ka 'Ohana 0 Kahikinui reports that during one such kona storm, scores of small waterfalls could be seen in the vicinity of Kipapa-Nakaohu; pers. comm., 1996.) None of the small water channels flow regularly today, but it is possible that there was more frequent discharge in pre-contact times when the forest line was significantly lower (and the water table higher as a result of dew drip precipitation) prior to the late nineteenth and twentieth-century depredations of cattle and goats. Such intermittent watercourses would have provided the main sources of surface water to the pre-contact Hawaiian population of Kahikinui. In the eastem portion of Kahikinui moku, slightly more deeply incised stream channels are found. However, since these reflect the older Kula Volcanic Series landscape which has had a longer time for water erosion to occur, they do not necessarily indicate a greater amount of surface water flow relative to the westem part of the moku. East of the Kipapa- Nakaohu survey area, for example, is Kepuni Gulch, where the U.S. Geological Survey has maintained a gauging station; from May 1963 to September 1965, the Kepuni stream had measur- Introduction 3 Figure 1.1 View of the Kahikinui uplands in Nakaohu Ahupua'a. able discharge on only four days (U.S.G.S. 1971:363). The rainfall gradient between the Haleakala summit and the coast is steep. Unfortunately, no rain gauges have been maintained in Kahikinui proper, so that rainfall has been extrapolated from stations at 'Ulupalakua to the west and Wai'6pai Ranch to the east. (A series of automated weather stations established in 1996 by Prof. Jim Juvik of the Univer- sity of Hawai'i, Hilo, will begin to provide precise weather data.) The upland zone between about 600-1,200 m elevation has been estimated to receive between 750-1,000 mm annually, mosdy in the winter months; this probably varies considerably from year to year. The coast is extremely arid as indicated by the lack of weathering of lava flows, for example, in the western part of Kipapa Ahupua'a. The upland portions of Kahikinui District still support the remnants of a once-remarkable dryland forest, with a diversity of endemic trees and shrubs, including halapepe (Pleomele auwahiensis), alahe'e (Canthium odoratum), hao (Rauvolfia sandwicensis), 'akia (Wikstroemia monticola), olopua (Nestegis sandwicensis), 'alei (Osteomeles anthyllidifolia), '5hi'a lehua (Metrosideros polymorpha), and others. This endemic forest has been sadly degraded through the effects of feral pigs, goats, and especially cattle (Medeiros, Loope, and Holt 1986). In the Kipapa-Nakaohu survey area, the uplands between ca. 350-750 m elevation are today dominated by a mix of exotic grasses including kikuyu grass (Pennisetum clandestinwn), lantana (Lantana camara), and koa haole (Leucaena glauca). However, significant numbers of native species such as wiliwili (Erythrina sandwicensis), 'ili- ahi (Santalum spp.), and 'a'ali'i (Dodonea eriocarpa) also persist. The lower elevations and coastal region are more barren, although scattered wiliwili and 'a'ali'i grow to within a few hundred meters of the coast. The coastal resources available to the pre-contact and early historic inhabitants of Kahikinui were more restricted than in other parts of Maui. The coastline is dominated by sea cliffs ranging from a few meters to 30-50 m high, making access difficult except in scattered locations where there are 4 NA Mea Kahiko o Kahikinul small bays with cobble or gravel beaches. Not surprisingly, these bays are marked by concentrations of archaeological sites, indicating that Native Hawaiians focused their coastal activities around them. There is no fringing reef along the Kahikinui coastline. The 'Alenuihaha Channel between Maui and Hawai'i is noted for its strong currents and rough seas, making fishing from small canoes hazardous. Surge-zone mollusks such as the prized 'opihi (Cellana exarata), small cowries or leho (Cypraea caputserpentis), nerites or pipipi (Nerita picea), drupes or pupd-'awa (Drupa ricinus), and sea urchins (wana, Centrechinus paucispinus; ha'uke'uke, Podophora atrata) can be gathered from the sea cliffs and lava rock benches, and octopus (he'e) inhabit the shallower waters immediately offshore (cowry-shell lures and "coffee-bean" type sinkers of the Iahe e fishing gear are among the most commonly found surface artifacts from Kahikinui sites). In such an 'dina malo'o, the Native Hawaiian population had to develop special methods and techniques for creating a viable subsistence economy. Being on the leeward side of Haleakala, Kahikinui contrasts markedly with such windward districts as Hana, or even the environmentally- transitional district of K7pahulu. In the latter regions, Hawaiian agriculture depended first and foremost upon cultivation of the taro or kalo (Colocasia esculenta), both in irrigated pondfields (lo'i) and in non-irrigated (rain-fed) plots. In Hana and KIpahulu, the climate is also favorable to the cultivation of breadfruit, 'ulu (Artocarpus altilis), as noted by Handy (1940:190). In Kahikinui, however, the main crop was the 'uala or sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas), among other reasons because it required far less rainfall, was more tolerant of periodic droughts, and produced high yields. Edward S. C. Handy, who made a study of traditional Hawaiian agricultural practices as they survived into the 1930s, called the region from Kaupo "through Kahikinui, Honuaula, and Kula . .. the greatest continuous dry planting area [for sweet potatoes] in the Hawaiian Islands" (1940:161). Taro was not unknown in Kahikinui, however, and Handy also reported: I am told by an old informant, bom at Kanaio in the next moku, that the Hawaiians formerly living along the coast of Kahikinui had their plantations of dry taro and other edibles inland in the forest zone, where the forest along the southern wall of Haleakala came much lower and where rainfall was more plentiful than it is today (1940:113). Thus it is likely that there was some vertical zonation of agriculture according to elevation, with sweet potatoes dominant in the mid-elevation range, and taro becoming more plentiful at the higher elevations and forest margins. The dearth of kuleana land claims from Kahikinui during the Mahele unfortunately deprives us of direct informa- tion on crops that were being cultivated at this time, such as are available for other regions (e.g., Kirch and Sahlins 1992). However, a few claims do exist for the adjacent district of Honua'ula (which has a similar climate and soil regime to Kahikinui). These claims, made by the maka'dinana of Honua'ula before the Lands Commission, speak of gardens (mnla) often situated within moku mau'u (literally, "islands of grassland"), the latter presumably being patches of deeper soil. Aside from sweet potatoes, these claimants mentioned sugar cane, dryland taro, and Irish potatoes (which had been introduced after contact) as crops being grown on their lands in 1847-48 (see L.C.A. 2405, 3676, 5331, 5455 and others, Native Register and Testimony, Archives of Hawai'i). The Mokuof Kahikinui In contemporary times, the island of Maui is divided into just four political districts (Hana, Makawao, Wailuku, and Lahaina). Thus it comes as a surprise to some who learn that in ancient times the island was divided into a substantially larger number of districts, or moku. Among the moku of east Maui mentioned in the Great Mahele of 1846-54 are the following: Kula, Hamakuapoko, Hamikualoa, Hana, Klpahulu, Kaup6, Kahikinui, and Honua'ula. That Kahikinui itself was a moku, and not simply an ahupua'a as some have incorrectly stated, is made clear in the Indices of Awards (1929:13), where "Ka Moku" of Kahikinui is included in the listing of Government Lands. Prior to the Mahele, the greater part of the district of Kahikinui was the personal estate of Lot Kamehameha, later to become King Kamehameha V. The Indices of Awards further notes that: ... by action of the Privy Council on Aug. 29, 1850, as recorded on page 423 of Vol. 3 of Privy Council Records, a Resolution was passed for his [Lot's] relief as follows: "Resolved that in consideration of the relinquishment of Kahikinui on East Maui, by Lot Kamehameha to the Government in former division of lands, the Minister of the Interior is hereby authorized to grant Royal Patents to Lot for his lands, said to be eighteen in number, without further division or commutation" (Commissioner of Public Lands 1929:7-8). Thus by giving over the greater part of Kahikinui moku to the Hawaiian Government for its purposes, Lot Kamehameha retained clear title to his other ahupua'a holdings throughout the Kingdom. The westernmost ahupua'a of Kahikinui, Auwahi, although part of the larger moku was not included among the lands deeded by Lot Kamehameha to the Government during the Mahele. Rather, this ahupua'a was awarded to Princess Ruta (Ruth) Ke'elikolani (L.C.A. 7716, Royal Patent 7791), Introduction 5 half-sister of Lot Kamehameha. Later, Auwahi would become part of the extensive holdings of 'Ulupalakua Ranch. The eastem ahupua'a of Manawainui later became part of Haleakala Ranch, and thus is also not part of the current holdings of the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. Lot Kamehameha's gift of Kahikinui to the Kingdom had an unintended consequence. Since the entire moku had been transferred to the Govemment, there was no dispute over the boundaries of its individual ahupua'a subdivisions. Thus, when the Boundary Commission later carried out its important task of taking testimony from kupa o ka 'aina regarding the specific divisions between ahupua'a throughout the Kingdom, they simply passed over Kahikinui. This leaves an unfortunate historical gap in our knowledge of the cultural landscape of Kahikinui, for those kama'dina who would have known the rocks, trees, ridge lines, and gulches that delineated each ahupua'a from the next have long since passed away. Today, we know only that there were eight ahupua'a within Kahikinui (Figure 1.2), their geographic order, and their relative locations to each other (but not specific boundary lines). From west to east, these ahupua'a are: Auwahi, Luala'ilua, Alena, Kipapa, Nakaohu, Nakaaha, Mahamenui, and Manawainui. Most maps suggest that the eastern boundary of Kahikinui was Wai'6pai Gulch, with Nakula lying in Kaup6 (e.g., Hawai'i Territory survey, 1929, 1" = 5,000'). However, because of the scarcity of Mghele awards in Kahikinui and Kaup6 (which would otherwise list the various ahupua'a) this question is difficult to resolve with certainty, and may require more in-depth archival research. The Hawaiian government evidently had little use for the arid lands of Kahikinui in the latter half of the nineteenth century. As Kahikinui became depopulated after about 1860, leases were let for cattle ranching, a practice that continued until the early 1990s. Following the illegitimate overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom in 1893 and annexation of the islands by the United States in 1900, considerable interest arose in the idea of making rural lands available for resettlement by Native Hawaiians. Prince Jonah Kuhio Kalanianaole was the main impetus behind the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act of 1920 (Daws 1968:297-98) through which certain tracts of former Govennent lands (then become Territorial lands) were to be umed over for the benefit of Native Hawaiians. Kahikinui (excepting Auwahi and Manawainui Ahupua'a, which had been *trferred/sold) was among these newly-designated Hawaiian Home Lands. Rather than being immediately resettled, -however, Kahikinui continued to be leased for cattle ranching, Primarily to 'Ulupalakua Ranch and later to several other Maui rnchers. In the context of this topographic history, it is also worth mentioning the deeper historical significance of the place name Kahikinui. Literally, Kahikinui can be translated as "Great Tahiti" (Pukui, Elbert, and Mookini 1974:64), and one might presume that the name was first applied in ancient times in commemoration of Tahiti Nui, perhaps by one of the famous Polynesian navigators who made the arduous voyage between the Society Islands and Hawai'i. But it seems that the reference was even more specific when first bestowed by whomever may have first glimpsed the great looming peak of Haleakala, as their double-hulled sailing canoe closed in from the south. For like the island of Tahiti, Maui is also a double-volcano, both having a low isthmus connecting smaller and larger mountain masses. On Tahiti, these two volcanic masses are named Tahiti Nui and Tahiti Iti. It seems probable-though it will never be provable-that one of the original voyagers to Hawai'i, perhaps sailing through the channel known as Ke Ala i Kahiki ("the road to Tahiti"), immediately recognized the striking topographic similarity between Maui and the homeland Tahiti. Generations later, after the lands of Maui were settled, and the ruling chiefs had imposed their territorial controls, Kahikinui presumably came to refer specifically and more narrowly to that portion of the island facing towards the south: the ancient voyaging route from Kahiki. This scenario is speculative, but it is in keeping with what we know of Polynesian voyaging and of the ancient pattern of naming new lands after old. Moreover, there is just a hint in the traditional oral literature of Hawai'i that such an event of naming Kahikinui after "Great Tahiti" actually took place at the end of a voyage from "Kahiki." The great nineteenth-century Hawaiian scholar Samuel Manaiakalani Kamakau wrote the following text about the "Coming of the Gods," which is to say the arrival of the first ancestors of the Hawaiian people: According to the mo'olelo of Kane and Kanaloa, they were perhaps the first who kept gods ('o laua paha na kahu akua mua) to come to Hawai'i nei, and because of their mana they were called gods. Kaho'olawe was first named Kanaloa for his having first come there by way of Ke-ala-i-kahiki. From Kaho'olawe the two went to Kahikinui, Maui, where they opened up the fishpond of Kanaloa at Lua-la'i-lua, and from them came the water of Kou at Kaupo (Kamakau 1991:112). Kahikinui in History That Kahikinui was a moku largely bypassed by the kings of Maui is suggested by the dearth of references to the district in such compendia of traditional history as Samuel Kamakau's Ruling Chiefs of Hawai'i (1961). No doubt this 'aina malo'o was largely shunned by the ruling chiefs (ali'i nui), who preferred to make their residences in such places as Hina and Klpahulu. This pattem was to continue into the post- 6 NA Mea Kahiko o Kahikinul Figure 1.2 Map of Kahikinui district showing the general locations of its eight ahupua'a and other features. contact era, for although Lot Kamehameha had control over most of the moku of Kahikinui prior to 1850, it was the land he chose to give over to the Hawaiian Government in lieu of commutation during the Great Mahele (see above). If the codified oral traditions are largely mute concerning Kahikinui in ancient times, the written documen- tary sources of the post-contact era are hardly much richer, a frustrating situation for those who wish to reconstruct the events of this period. The first European explorer to sail along the southeast Maui coast was Jean-Francois de Galaup de la Perouse, in command of the French frigates Boussole and Astrolabe. On the morning of May 28th, 1786, La Perouse's ships sighted the snow-covered summits of Hawai'i Island and soon after, that of Haleakala. La Perouse wrote that "the island of Maui looked delightful," and he directed his ships to coast it one league offshore. His sea-weary crew was enthralled with "waterfalls tumbling down the mountainside into the sea," as they passed KTpahulu and Kaup6 (Dunmore, ed., 1994:80). But this idyllic landscape was soon replaced as "the mountains receded towards the interior of the island." Introduction 7 We saw no more waterfalls, the trees were fairly sparsely planted along the plain, and the villages, consisting only of 10 or 12 huts, were quite distant from each other. Every moment made us regret the country which we were leaving behind, and we only found shelter when we were faced with a frightful shore, where the lava had once run down as waterfalls do today in the other part of the island (Dunmore, ed. 1994:82). La Perouse found shelter later that afternoon off the small fishing village of Keone'o'io, in Honua'ula District, where he was able to drop anchor and go ashore the next day, giving us one of the first accounts of traditional Hawaiian houses on Maui (Kirch and Babineau 1996:69). That in the interval between Kipahulu-Kaup6 and Keone'o'io the French explorer reports only small "villages" of 10-12 huts along the shore is curious. We know from recent archaeological research-as reported in this volume-that there was in fact a fairly large and densely settled Native Hawaiian population in Kahikinui, yet there is no indication of such in La Perouse's account. However, this population was largely concentrated in an upland zone above about 300 m elevation, and evidently made use of the immediate coastal strip only for fishing and shellfish gathering. Moreover, the topographic slope in Kahikinui is such that when one is standing on the coast (and presumably also sailing in a ship close to shore), a large part of the upland settlement zone is out-of-sight, due to a change in the angle of slope above the 300 m contour (i.e., the area mauka of St. Ynez Church). It seems likely that La Perouse observed only the intermittently-utilized coastal residences (mistaking these for "villages") of a population that resided primarily in the uplands, where their main gardens and temples were located. This is a seemingly minor but nonetheless important point, for it bears on the issue of early European estimates of population based on shipboard observations of the immediate coastal zone (see Stannard 1989). Indeed, estimating the population of Kahikinui both "on the eve" of Western contact, and during the following decades of the early nineteenth century, is a frustrating matter. Our recent archaeological studies indicate that the land was densely settled in pre-contact times, but deriving actual population numbers from archaeological remains is a complex matter, and it will require both more survey and extensive radiocarbon dating before an order-of-magnitude estimate of the pre-contact population can safely be ventured. Early missionary census figures from the period 1831-36 portray a very small population in relation to other parts of Maui. For example, in the 1831-32 census of Maui, Kahikinui District was reported to have some 517 occupants out of an island-wide total of 35,062 (Schmitt 1973:18, Appendix A). By 1836 this population had declined to 447 out of a total of 24,195 (1973:36, Appendix C). While it is possible that the Protestant missionaries who undertook these censuses may have under estimated the largely Catholic population of Kahikinui, they nonetheless had the overt support of the local Govemment authorities, such as konohiki, and therefore such under- estimation is in my view unlikely. Coulter, who made an extensive study of the 1853 Government census and its geographic distribution, observed that "the districts of Kaupo and Kahikinui, dissected uplands of little rainfall on the lee side of Mount Haleakala, were almost uninhabited" by that time (1931:23). His map (1931, Figure 8) indicates a popula- tion of no more than 50 persons. The unanswered questions arising from these figures are first, what was the maximum population of Kahikinui prior to Western contact, and second, what was the rate of decline after contact? The first missionary figures date to 1831, more than five decades after Cook's expedition first introduced venereal (and perhaps other) diseases, certainly more than enough time for a precipitous demographic collapse. (Sand [1995] presents a poignant argument for just such collapse of the Kanak population in New Caledonia, and his arguments against the establishment view of academic demography deserve to be read by those concemed with the Hawaiian case.) The simple fact is that the existing documentary sources can never answer these questions. Rather, the challenge rests with archaeology. As noted earlier, Kahikinui has always been something of a hinterland, not only environmentally but culturally. Thus it is perhaps not surprising to find that Kahikinui was a major refuge for Native Hawaiians who had adopted the Catholic faith in the first half of the nineteenth century, a time when the official (and exclusively legal) religion of the islands was the Congregational Protestant denomination introduced by the missionaries of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions. High chiefess Ka'ahumanu, Kuhina Nui ("Regent") of the Kingdom during the reign of Kamehameha II and early part of the reign of Kamehameha III, had adopted this new religion following the famous 'ai noa of 1819 after the death of Kamehameha I, and had appointed Hiram Bingham as a new kind of Kahuna Nui or "high priest" (Sahlins 1992:67-68). Successive attempts by French Catholics to establish a mission in the islands between 182640 were met by varied forms of hostility and outright aggression, to which the French responded at times with gunboat diplomacy (Kuykendall 1938:137-47). Precisely when the Native Hawaiian population of Kahikinui was converted to the Catholic faith seems not to be recorded (the first "official" mission on Maui dates to 1846), but a thatched church (hale pili) was evidently constructed at the site of the present St. Ynez Church ruin in Nakaohu 8 NA Mea Kahiko o Kahikinul Ahupua'a sometime during the late 1830s (Ashdown 1973:6). The leader of the Kahikinui Catholics was Helio Kaiwiloa (sometimes recorded as Koa'eloa [e.g., Anon. 1963]), known also as the "Apostle of Maui" (Bartholomew 1994:19). According to Ashdown (1973:6), the first church was bumed by local authorities, only to be quickly reconstructed. Helio Kaiwiloa and another fervent Catholic of Kahikinui, Simeon Kaoao, gained renown in 1843 with the infamous pa'a kaula ("tying with ropes") incident. As recounted by Bartholomew, ... the Protestant mission at Hina notified the police that a small group of defiant Catholic women were congregat- ing for prayer at Kahikinui. The police dutifully arrested them, tied them to each other with sennit, and marched them eastwards toward Wailuku, 90 miles away. As word was passed along the route, other converts asked to be tethered to their fellow believers and joined the procession along Hana's coast, dressed in their lei-bedecked Sunday best. By the time they reached Wailuku a month later, their numbers had risen to over 100. The judge, seeing the futility of prosecuting such a large group, dismissed the charges (1994:19). After a legitimate Catholic mission had been established in the islands in 1846, the Kahikinui congregation could practice its faith openly, and the French fathers visited the district intermittently. The diary of Father Modest Favens (also known as Pekelo) records that on May 1, 1846 he arrived "in early morning at Kahikinui by trail along the seashore. Mass and prayers. Examination of catechumens ... baptize 15 children on the spot" (Schoofs 1978:265). In July of that year Father Favens also reported that Kahikinui had "a nice little chapel [St. Ynez] flanked by a cottage for the priest" (1978:278). Schoofs continues: Legend has it that catechist Helio Kaiwiloa was respon- sible for having the people of Kahikinui erect these buildings. Kahikinui was not a 'regular' village where people lived close together. Its pili-grass cottages were spread out far and wide under trees and shrubs. Neverthe- less at one time Kahikinui, which was the birthplace of catechist Simon Kaoao, who donated part of his property to build a school, was a devout community. It is here that Simon came back to die in December, 1846, after guiding Father Favens through the district" (1978:278). A major event that took place sometime during the 1830s-40s was the construction of the "Hoapili Trail", the coastal route that runs through Honua'ula and Kahikinui and on to Kaupo. The curbstone-lined trail, about 2 m wide and with well-constructed causeways where it crosses depressions in the lava or small stream channels, was constructed by Native Hawaiians who had been sentenced for violating the laws against theft, adultery, drinking, and so forth, first issued as edicts by Govemor Hoapili around 1826, and later codified in the penal code adopted by King Kamehameha III in 1835 (Kuykendall 1938:136, 163). Such offenders provided the principal labor source for road building both on Maui and Hawai'i Islands (Apple 1965:45). The missionary Henry T. Cheever traveled along the Hoapili Trail in the late 1840s, and described it as follows: Yet it is a way not devoid for interest and novelty, especially that part of it which runs from Honuaula to Kahikinui and Kaupo; for it is a road built by the convicts of adultery, some years ago, when the laws relating to that and other crimes were first enacted, under the administra- tion of the celebrated chief Hoapili, in whom was the first example of a Christian marriage. It is altogether the noblest and best Hawaiian work of internal improvement I have anywhere seen. It is carried directly over a large verdureless tract, inundated and heaved up by an eruption from the giant crater of Hale-a- ka-la; and when it is considered that it was made by convicts, without sledgehammers, or crowbars, or any other instrument but the human hands, holding a stone, and the Hawaiian Oo, it is worthy of great admiration (Cheever 1851:105). No series of events could have had more sweeping consequences for the Native Hawaiian people than those culminating in the Great Mahele of 1848-52, which not only imposed upon the islands a Western, allodial system of land tenure, but in so many other ways marked the end of the old chiefly regime (Kirch and Sahlins 1992; Kame'eleihiwa 1992). And yet, the participation of the maka'aJinana populace of Kahikinui in the Mahele was almost nil. Aside from the granting of the several ahupua'a to Lot Kamehameha and Ruta Ke'elikolani (see above), only a single mnaka'ainana submitted a claim to the Lands Commission. This was Makaole of Luala'ilua Ahupua'a, who submitted his claim for two house sites, and various garden plots, as well as salt-collecting areas on the coast (Commissioner of Public Lands 1929, L.C.A. 5404; Native Register 6:286, Foreign Testimony 8:227, Native Testimony 5:360, Archives of Hawai'i). Why it was that others did not submit claims is not known, although it is conceivable that their status as Catholics could have mitigated against them in the eyes of staunch Protestant members of the Lands Commission. A physician, Dr. James Rae, provides a rare account of a trip through Kahikinui District in 1853 (Rae, Ms.). Leaving Kaup6, Dr. Rae "came on about seven miles to the house of Makaole," at Luala'ilua Hills. He ate a meal of sweet potatoes with Makaole's family, and described several groups Introduction 9 of travelers passing by, including a woman carrying two turkeys and a pig, and another with a load of watermelons. Rae observed that "here and there are patches suited to the sweet potato and Kalo." His description of Makaole's house provides a glimpse of household life at mid-century: Makaole's house very comfortable, about 20 by 28 [feet]. The family were all seated under a tree on a spot where the stones had been cleared away and the space covered with dry grass. In a corner of the sort of wall thus formed a fireplace and hanging on the tree, their calabashes. They were just removing the pot from the fire containing a fowl in fragments and asked me to partake which I did with sweet potatoes.... There was a small square spot within the entrance covered with coarse mat. The rest well matted. The third of the house which I slept raised a little by the mats. I counted ten besides the upper fme one 8 x 17. The woman made a calico curtain, purple and pink, thrown down at night. Strings stretched across with great abundance of Kapas. They covered me with two, a blanket & many articles of clothing in good order & ditto quality (Rae, Ms.). The small Native Hawaiian population resident in Kahikinui seems to have declined rapidly after the Mahele, and St. Ynez Church itself was evidently abandoned sometime in the 1860s. Cattle ranching had begun in earnest in adjacent 'Ulupalakua and Kaup6 by this time, and a Portugese rancher named M. Pico (also spelled "Paiko") was running cattle in Kahikinui in the 1880s. As a boy, E. D. Baldwin visited Paiko's house in Kahikinui while assisting with the Government survey. In October of 1881, Baldwin recounts "packing all of our drinking water from Paiko's tanks", and visiting "Paiko's windmill . . . located below Lualailua Hills, about a mile back from the sea" (Baldwin, Ms.). By the tum of the century a small independent Kahikinui Ranch was operating out of Kahikinui House, which still stands northeast of St. Ynez Church. According to the present owner of 'Ulupalakua Ranch, Mr. Pardee Erdman (pers. comm., June 7, 1996), Kahikinui House was constructed by two Portuguese ranchers, Enos and Feirrera, who hauled the timber up from Nu'u Landing. Erdman said that the house was meant to be constructed in Mahamenui, where Enos and Feirrera had a 11 8-acre exclusion (indicated on Territorial tax map dated May 1934 as "Grant 2824," Zone 1, Section 9, Plat 2), but was built in Nakaohu instead. Enos and Feirrera reportedly sold Kahikinui Ranch to Dr. James Raymond who reacquired 'Ulupalakua Ranch (Raymond had married Phoebe K. Dowsett, widow of Charles Makee and daughter-in-law of Captain James Makee [founder of 'Ulupalakua Ranch], in 1898). For much of this century, the lands of Kahikinui were under lease to 'Ulupalakua Ranch. Recovering Kahikinui's Deeper Past: The Contribution of Archaeology The documentary history of Kahikinui in the post- contact period is disappointing in the limitation of primary sources and in the general dearth of information, especially when compared to other regions of Maui, such as Lahaina or Hina. The situation is not much different for the pre-contact period, for Kahikinui does not figure prominently in traditional lore. Yet we know that this vast moku was once the home of a thriving Native Hawaiian population, for the land bears witness in the literally thousands of stone structures-ranging from simple terraces and enclosures of the maka'ainana to the massive heiau enclosures of the ali'i-that are to be found over its slopes from sea level up to 1,000 m elevation or more. Indeed, it is from these material remains left by generations of ka po'e kahiko-ka po'e o ka 'dina-that a deeper and more informed history of this moku may be written. Archaeology is the art and the science of discovering, recording, investigating, and learning from such material remains of the past. Its most central goal is to write history when no texts, either written or spoken, exist as a guide. The lack of written records or for that matter of oral traditions, might appear to some as an intractable obstacle. But as French historian Jacquelin de Romilly says, "when the past is inscribed forcibly into history, it can never be effaced." The landscape of Kahikinui has been indelibly inscribed through the countless daily actions, the repeated cultural pattems of generations who lived out their lives on this 'aina malo'o, those who claimed this land and made it their own. It is the task of archaeology to explore, discover, record, and interpret-with cultural sensitivity-this sedimentary landscape, thereby reaching across time and gifting us with the means to write its history. The first comprehensive efforts to record archaeo- logical sites throughout the Hawaiian Islands began to be undertaken in the 1920s and 30s, under the auspices of the Bemice P. Bishop Museum in conjunction with Yale University (Hiroa 1945). In 1929, Winslow Walker was appointed a Yale University-Bishop Museum Fellow, and was assigned the task of surveying the archaeological sites of Maui Island (Hiroa 1945:57; Walker 1931). The assignment must have seemed overwhelming to the young Walker, who followed the precedent set by Kenneth Emory, Wendell Bennett, and others of focusing primarily on the largest monumental stone constructions, principally heiau. With limited time and resources to cover an entire unmapped island, Walker reason- ably turned to the Native Hawaiian community for information on the ruins of known heiau. In Kahikinui, he was guided to several of these temples, mapping some with compass-and- 10 NAi Mea Kahiko o Kahikinul tape, and recording such information as his guides were inclined to divulge. It was a limited and tentative start, but today we are grateful for what Walker-with the essential help of his Native Hawaiian guides-recorded, for it is the basis of our knowledge of Kahikinui's elaborate heiau system (see Kolb and Radewagen, Chapter 5, this volume). Beginning in 1950, archaeology in Hawai'i under- went a resurgence, largely under the impetus of Kenneth P. Emory of the Bishop Museum and sparked in part by the discovery of the radiocarbon dating method, which for the first time gave the ability to determine in an "absolute" or calendrical sense the age of organic materials recovered from archaeological contexts. Emory, joined by colleagues Yosihiko Sinoto and William J. Bonk, commenced a program of excavations through the archipelago which began to reveal a long and complex prehistory, extending back as far as the beginning of the Christian era, with the arrival of the first Polynesians from islands to the south. Unfortunately, during this exciting period of research Maui was largely neglected, and Kahikinui almost completely so. The only site in southeast Maui investigated during this period was a small cave in Mahamenui, test excavated by Emory in 1961 (Chapman and Kirch 1979:19). By the 1960s, archaeologists throughout Polynesia had become interested in applying a settlement pattern approach, in which not just deeply-stratified or early sites, but all of the varied material remains distributed across a landscape were recorded and studied in their geographic context. Through such a settlement pattern approach, it was hoped that a more complete understanding of the past could be achieved, both in terms of how people adapted to and used their natural environ- ment, and how they spatially organized their daily lives with distinctive social and cultural pattems. In 1966 Peter S. Chapman, a Honolulu-born graduate student at Stanford University and affiliate of the Bishop Museum, set out to apply a settlement pattern study in the long-neglected Kahikinui District. Chapman decided to focus on two ahupua'a, KYpapa and Nakaohu, in the core of the moku. The methods of settlement pattern archaeology were still new in 1966; as a young member of the field team, I remember the bewilderment that all of us faced as we tried to grapple with the problems of recording the unexpectedly large number and architectural diversity of sites that we uncovered under the exotic lantana in the KYpapa uplands. Throughout the summer of 1966, and during a follow-up survey in January of 1967, Chapman's team slowly worked its way through the uplands of Kipapa and Nakaohu, and over the more readily visible makai landscape. Although our team fell short of achieving Chapman's original goal of 100 percent coverage of both ahupua'a, a large part of the mauka region was mapped, as well as the entire coastal strip. A total of 544 sites was recorded, numbered, and mapped, and a preliminary "settlement pattern map" of these was compiled by William Kikuchi, based on detailed plane-table-and-alidade survey maps by Kirch and Kikuchi (at 1" = 200'). This was the first intensive survey effort of this kind in the Hawaiian Islands, shortly to be followed by similar projects on O'ahu (Green 1969), Moloka'i (Kirch and Kelly 1975), and Hawai'i (Pearson et al. 1968; Tuggle and Griffin 1973; Rosendahl 1972). Tragically, Peter Chapman fell ill not long after the 1966-67 fieldwork was completed. He struggled for some years with illness, always intending to complete his analysis and publication of the Kahikinui survey, but in the end passed away without seeing this pioneering work come to fruition. He would, I know, be pleased that after three decades his efforts have been resurrected. During the 1970s and 80s, Kahikinui was ignored or bypassed by archaeologists, even though the pace of archaeo- logical research in general accelerated greatly in Hawai'i during this time (Kirch 1985). Over the past several years, however, a series of serendipitous events have led to a resurgence of interest in the archaeology of Kahikinui. A major factor was the grass-roots organizing of Ka 'Ohana 0 Kahikinui, which began to lobby for the return of this vast moku to the Native Hawaiian people, for their direct benefit. As the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands began to plan for the possibility of facilitating resettlement in the region, it entered into discussions with the State Historic Preservation Division regarding archaeological sites. A rapid aerial reconnaissance survey of portions of the upland zone was contracted for with Cultural Surveys, Hawai'i in 1994 (Hammatt and Folk 1994). Their survey, although extremely limited in new data pre- sented, reinforced the earlier findings of the 1966 Chapman survey that archaeological remains were abundant in certain parts of this zone. At about the same time, a narrow corridor paralleling Highway 31 was surveyed by Conrad Erkelens of Intemational Archaeological Research Inc. (1995), in conjunc- tion with the possibility that a geothermal powerline might be routed through Kahikinui. Erkelen's survey, though limited in areal extent, likewise indicated a high density of archaeological features. Independent of these developments, I had begun to explore the possibility of reactivating and extending the 1966 Chapman survey. In 1993, I was on Maui soon after Ka 'Ohana O Kahikinui established their camp, appropriately enough in the stone ruins of St. Ynez Church. I stopped to discuss their plans and aspirations, and after returning to Berkeley was inspired to return to the 1966 data and begin the task of bringing Chapman's project to fruition. As Cindy Van Gilder and I began to convert the 1966 records into a modern Introduction 1 1 computer database, I realized that I would have to return to Kahikinui to continue Peter's work in the field. In January 1995, 1 retumed to Klpapa-Nakaohu with my students, in order to re-check and evaluate the quality of the 1966 data. Not only did this trip confirm the quality of the 1966 notes, but walking once again over that rugged landscape I became convinced that Kahikinui had so much more to offer in terms of its cultural history. I knew it would be necessary to devote serious effort to completing the work begun by Peter Chapman three decades earlier. In the summer of 1995 I returned with a team of U.C. Berkeley students, with the goal of filling in some of the gaps not covered during the 1966 survey of Klpapa-Nakaohu Ahupua'a. With assistance provided by the State Historic Preservation Division and their Maui field crew (kindly made available by Chief Archaeologist Dr. Ross Cordy), we added another 462 archaeological sites to the database for these two ahupua'a (Kirch and Van Gilder 1996). In this work, the members of Ka 'Ohana 0 Kahikinui were helpful and extremely interested. Based on the results of that season, I applied for grant support from the National Geographic Society and from the U.S. National Science Foundation, to support an expanded project. Both grants were subsequently awarded, and in the summer of 1996 our team continued its work, focusing on the excavation of selected kauhale settlement sites in the Kipapa uplands (Van Gilder and Kirch, Chapter 4, this volume). In the spring of 1997, we continued our work by filling in a major survey gap in the "intermediate zone" between Highway 31 and the coastal strip, and with further excavations. Peter Chapman's goal of a complete survey of the archaeological remains of two entire ahupua'a within Kahikinui finally appears within sight. Meanwhile, other archaeologists have also been active in Kahikinui. Through its contractual arrangement with the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, the State Historic Preservation Division has allocated its Maui field team since late 1995 under the direction of Dr. Boyd Dixon-to survey and investigate sites that might be affected by the Department's plans to open up parts of the Kahikinui uplands to resettlement by Native Hawaiians. Dixon's team has intensively surveyed a large area in the upper elevation zones of Kipapa, Nakaohu, and Nakaaha Ahupua'a, thus extending the 1966 Chapman survey to the upper limits of archaeological site distribution (see Dixon et al., Chapter 3, this volume). Moreover, Dixon's group has carried out test excavations in a large number of these sites, providing significant information on the age and function of these features. Dixon's team has also worked closely with Ka 'Ohana 0 Kahikinui, and their findings will be essential in seeing that important cultural remains in this resettlement area are identified and protected as the land once again becomes the setting for an active and vital Hawaiian community. Professor Michael Kolb of Northern Illinois University (NIU) has also been a participant in the renewed archaeological work in Kahikinui. For some years Prof. Kolb has been studying the heiau of Maui Island, and in the early 1990s he directed an archaeological investigation of Hawaiian Home Lands in Kula District. Prof. Kolb was interested in the possibilities of studying the heiau of Kahikinui, and in 1996 he began the first phase of such a project with the assistance of archaeology students from NIU. His preliminary results are summarized here in Chapter 5. Kahikinui is today virtually unique within the Hawaiian Islands as an entire moku with its archaeological and cultural landscape preserved essentially intact. The task of surveying, recording, studying, and interpreting the literally thousands of archaeological sites and features dispersed over this landscape is daunting, and cannot be accomplished by a single researcher or team of researchers. Yet the challenge to record, understand, and leam from this legacy of the landscape confronts us, even as the 'aina of Kahikinui prepares to once again welcome a living community. Only through the coopera- tive efforts of all of us presently engaged in this endeavor- State of Hawai'i archaeologists, students and professors from mainland universities, members of Ka 'Ohana 0 Kahikinui, interested community volunteers will the materials to write a full history of Kahikinui in time be accumulated. It is our mutual hope that this volume will stimulate all who care for and love the 'dina malo'o of Kahikinui to leam more of her deep and rich history.