DOCSLIB.ORG

HA Vol. 7 For

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
HA Vol. 7 For hawaiian archaeology 7 Volume 7, 1999 Society for Hawaiian Archaeology hawaiian archaeology Volume 7, 1999 Society for Hawaiian Archaeology Editor’s Note 3 Elaine Rogers Jourdane Obituary for Catherine Cooke Summers 8 Papers Patrick C. McCoy Neither Here nor There: A Rites of Passage Site on the Eastern Fringes of the Mauna Kea Adze Quarry, Hawai‘i 11 Tim Denham, Francis J. Eblé, Palaeoenvironmental and Archaeological Barbara Winsborough, and Investigations at ‘Öhi‘apilo Pond, Leeward Jerome V. Ward Coast of Moloka‘i, Hawai‘i 35 Forum Patrick V. Kirch Hawaiian Archaeology: Past, Present, and Future 60 C. Këhaunani Cachola-Abad and He Pane Ho‘omälamalama: Setting the Record Edward Halealoha Ayau Straight and a Second Call for Partnership 73 Ross Cordy Thoughts from the Chaotic Midst of Hawaiian Archaeology 82 P. Bion Griffin Hawaiian Archaeology: A Post-Colonial History 89 Yosihiko H. Sinoto Some Comments on “Hawaiian Archaeology: Past, Present and Future” 99 hawaiian archaeology 7 Tom Dye, Editor Production of this volume was made possible with the generous financial assistance of Scientific Consultant Services, Inc. Cultural Resource Management Services issn 0890–1678 Contributor notes and subscription information can be found on the second to the last page of this volume. Editor‘s Note It is difficult to remember the state of Hawaiian archaeology before the Society’s Annual Conferences began over a decade ago. Begun at a time when the center of archaeological activity had nearly completed its disper- sal to the many cultural resources management firms from its old centers at Bishop Museum and the University of Hawai‘i, the conferences brought together archaeologists whose daily work rarely, if ever, did so. The sharing of information and ideas that are the goals of the conference have been enthusiastically embraced by the members—so much so that papers that once would have been offered at the old monthly (now quarterly) speakers’ series are now routinely held back for presentation at the more prestigious conference. Most of us look forward to the conference and find it an excit- ing time, both intellectually and socially. So it was at the 10th annual conference hosted by Pila Kikuchi, Nancy McMahon, and Martha Yent at Kaua‘i Community College. Pat Kirch, Class of 1954 Professor of Anthropology at the University of California at Berke- ley, gave the conference a rousing start on Friday night with a keynote address that, in just over one hour, managed to canvas our discipline’s past and its present, and to speculate on what the future might hold. Pat’s per- spective, which has grown from his many years on the Mainland after a pro- lific career at Bishop Museum, was a fascinating mix of first-hand knowl- edge, detached observation, and academic politics that sketched the broad outlines of change in institutional terms. At the heart of the talk were Pat’s opinions about the proper and necessary functions of four archaeological 3 4 hawaiian archaeology institutions—the CRM firms, the State Historic Preservation Division, B.P. Bishop Museum, and the University of Hawai‘i at Mänoa Anthropology Department—and his conviction that the institutional balance that consti- tutes a healthy discipline has now been lost. From my position, after six intense and often trying years with the State Historic Preservation Division where it was frequently clear that something wasn’t right, much of what Pat said made good sense and I was captivated by the vision of institu- tional balance and harmony that he was promoting. It seemed that night like a very worthwhile idea to think about. So, when Rob Hommon and Pat approached me with their idea to submit a revised version of the keynote address to Hawaiian Archaeology, I quite happily agreed to the idea. It wasn’t until the next week that I caught wind of a strongly negative reaction to Pat’s address. I was teaching a graduate seminar in historic preservation at Mänoa on Tuesday evenings and both faculty and students made it abundantly clear to me during some animated discussions that they were not at all swayed by Pat’s portrayal of their institution’s role nor did they agree with his assessment of their efforts. Not only did their insti- tutional balances weigh with different scales, their interpretations of the discipline’s history focused on different events and highlighted other trends. With what I hoped was an editor’s eye to a potentially interesting clash of ideas, I decided to put together a forum on the topics raised in the keynote address and I invited responses from distinguished society mem- bers representing each of the institutions that Pat had singled out. I am delighted that Yosi Sinoto, Senior Anthropologist and Kenneth P. Emory Distinguished Chair in Anthropology at Bishop Museum, Bion Griffin, Pro- fessor of Anthropology and Department Chair at the University of Hawai‘i, Mänoa, and Ross Cordy, Archaeological Branch Chief at the State Historic Preservation Division all took time from their busy schedules to provide thoughtful essays on themes that Pat touched upon in his keynote address. A fourth essay, solicited from a prominent member of the contract archae- ology profession, was never written. Given the theme that runs through Kirch’s keynote address that contract archaeologists give back too little to the public, it might be tempting to read a lot into this situation. Is the unwritten essay another example of contract archaeology taking care of its bottom line first? Fortunately, this is not the story here. Instead, the archaeologist simply agreed with Pat so completely that in the end he could find nothing that he believed really needed to be said. Soon after my invitations went out, I received a telephone call from Këhau Abad, an archaeologist who is not a member of the Society, but whose 5 editor’s note publications on Hawaiian prehistory I have read with interest. She expressed an interest in writing a response from the native Hawaiian point of view, and I quite happily agreed to this idea, too. Her essay with Eddie Ayau, for- mer head of the State burials program, rounds out the responses to Kirch’s keynote address. I thank all of the commentators for responding to a draft of Kirch’s keynote address. They took their tasks seriously and have written on important issues with courage, precision, wit, and commitment. Some minor editorial corrections to Kirch’s draft were made prior to its publication. As far as I can tell, these did not change the substance of his argument in any way and they should not have any effect on the comments, either. If this somewhat disjointed editorial process did introduce errors, then blame the editor and not the authors. They worked too hard on the substantive issues to endure criticism for minor points of scholarship. Abad and Ayau’s original draft contained detailed citations to Kirch’s draft and I thank them for agreeing to remove these. The production process at Hawaiian Archaeology has no ready facility for cross-references to pages within the same issue. The commentors betray a wide variety of opinions, but there is clear una- nimity about several things—the desirability of cooperation among archae- ologists and native Hawaiians, the pervasive influence of cultural resources management concepts, and the central role of the State Historic Preserva- tion Division. In today’s world, these issues are inextricably linked. Although most of the essays are, at best, ambivalent about cultural resources management, one beneficial effect of having archaeology firmly embedded in the regulatory nexus is that the consultation evoked by Abad and Ayau’s oli kähea / oli komo metaphor is today routinely carried out as part of the environmental review required of development projects by Fed- eral, State, and County agencies. As a key part of this consultation process, the SHPD performs an enormous service for which it receives little credit. Day in and day out the archaeological staff of the Division review develop- ment proposals for possible effects on historic sites. When an effect, or a possible effect, is identified, then the developer starts the historic preserva- tion review process. This process, despite the lack of an administrative rule to guide it, does succeed in making historic preservation issues a matter of public record and this is accomplished today on a routine basis. It would undoubtedly be preferable to have an administrative rule in place, and the critics are certainly right that the lack of a rule might prove fatal to historic preservation concerns if push came to shove, but in fact the process gener- ally works quite well. The archaeologists at SHPD deserve more credit than they usually get for this job. 6 hawaiian archaeology One reason that the development review is rarely praised is that the pub- lic’s interest in historic preservation is usually episodic and intense and does not extend to the more general issues surrounding management of the cul- tural resource base in the face of a development-oriented economy. The primary exception to this generalization is the public interest in human burials, which has been both sustained and extremely effective in changing the way that human remains in unmarked graves are treated in Hawai‘i. But even here, there is a tendency to look away from the larger picture. There is no doubt in my mind that human burials could be better protected if bur- ial areas were registered with the SHPD, so that they could be identified early in the development process, rather than discovered later, when the range of possible mitigation measures might be constrained or when dam- age to bones has already occurred.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Yosihiko Sinoto and the Hawaiian Fishhook Typology
    Amanda Landis ANTH 464: Hawaiian Archaeology Dr. T. Hunt 10 April 2007 The Quiet Revolutionary: Yosihiko Sinoto and the Hawaiian Fishhook Typology Yosihiko Sinoto is not an international anthropology superstar. He is not famous - - or, at least his name is not instantly recognisable. Even his mentor Kenneth Emory is more illustrious. It is difficult to find his work in public and popular forums, such as the internet, unless you know exactly what you are looking for. However, with Yosi Sinoto first impressions -- even the lack of them -- are deceiving. Sinoto is, arguably, one of the most important archaeologists working in Oceania. Many modern accepted wisdoms of the ancient long distance-voyaging are based on the work Sinoto did throughout the Pacific. Sinoto’s definitive work throughout the Hawaiian Islands and French Polynesia established not only a chronology of settlement for Hawaii, but for migration in the Pacific as well. In Hawaii, however, Sinoto is most famous for his work with fishhooks. Sinoto believed that fishhooks could be used as a marking point on a cultural sequence -- specifically, using fishhook types to create a relative chronology. With fellow archaeologists Kenneth Emory and William J. Bonk, Sinoto was able to use fishhooks to create a settlement timeline for Eastern Polynesia as well as prove origins and inter-island interactions of the ancient people of Oceania. Even though some of Sinoto’s methods and 1 theories may have fallen out of favour, Yosi Sinoto’s work with Hawaiian fishhooks remains influential to this day. Born in Japan in 1925, Yoshiko Sinoto, the son of a scientist, became entranced by archaeology at a young age.
    [Show full text]
  • A Preliminary Report of the Biology of the Genus Charpentiera (Amaranthaceae) I
    Pacific Science (1973), Vol. 27, No.4, p. 399-405 Printed in Great Britain A Preliminary Report of the Biology of the Genus Charpentiera (Amaranthaceae) I S. H. SOHMER 2 ABSTRACT: The genus Charpentiera (Amaranthaceae), found in the Hawaiian and Austral archipelagoes, has a structurally gynodioecious but functionally dioecious breeding system. The sex ratio varies from taxon to taxon within the genus. The sex-determining mechanism is unknown. A high rate ofovule sterility is found in all the taxa, which i~ not predicted by the pollen sterility figures reported. Data concern­ ing seed size, pollen size, and seed germination potential are provided. Hybridization is demonstrated to occur between Charpentiera densiflora Sohmer and C. elliptica (Hilleb.) Heller. Reproductive isolation is reported for C. tomentosa var. tomentosa Sohmer and C. obovata Gaud. THE GENUS Charpentiera is indigenous to the often small and thinly scattered throughout the Hawaiian Islands. In 1934 it was also found mature ecosystems of the generic range. Popu­ on two of the Austral Islands approximately lations of several of the taxa, however, are 2,800 miles disjunct from Hawaii (Suessenguth sometimes numerous in certain areas such as 1936). The members of the genus are trees the heads of deep gulches in some of the highly ranging from about 8 to 40 feet high and are dissected volcanic ranges of the islands. During of diverse habit, with pendant, compound the course of the revision, the reproductive panicles of minute, anemophilous flowers. The biology of Charpentiera was investigated. fruit is indehiscent and uniovulate. A recent systematic revision of Charpentiera (Sohmer 1972) has recognized six major taxa in the SEX RATIO AND TENDENCY TO DIOECISM genus.
    [Show full text]
  • Center for Pacific Islands Studies Newsletter
    University of Hawai'i at Manoa Center for Pacific Islands Studies Newsletter sept¢mber/Octotier LIBRARY TO CLOSE SUMMER 1989 ~thro_Pology, University of British Columbia, spoke on Hamilton Library, which houses the U.H. Pacific Col­ Quantity as a Cultural System: Some Problems in the In­ lection, will be closed from May 15 to August 15 of 1989 terpretation of Kiribati Language and Culture." to allow removal of ceiling material containing asbestos. On November 4, Lei'ataua Vaiao Ala'ilima gave an Hamilton Library is one of the few remaining buildings "Overview of the Political and Economic Situation in on the U.H. campus from which asbestos has not been Western Samoa"; and Fay Ala'ilima presented "Commen­ removed. The project for the summer of 1989 is to taries on the Life of Aggie Gray." remove the ceiling material on the makai half of the 2nd UPCOMING SEMINARS floor which has suffered serious water damage over the On Tuesday, November 29, from 11:30 to 1:00 in Por­ past few years. teus 704F, Dr. Robert Aldrich, Senior Lecturer in The materials in the Pacific Collection will not be avail­ Economic History from the University of Sydney, will able. However, there is a general collection of Pacific speak on "The French Presence in the South Pacific." literature available in Sinclair Library and hours will be extended to assist faculty and students. Pacific Curator OTHER CENTER ACTIVITIES Karen Peacock and Pacific Specialists Lynette Furuhashi Dr. Kiste visited Washington to attend the National and Renee Heyum will be engaged in special projects for Resource Centers' annual meeting October 16 to 26.
    [Show full text]
  • Urera Kaalae
    Plants Opuhe Urera kaalae SPECIES STATUS: Federally Listed as Endangered Genetic Safety Net Species J.K.Obata©Smithsonian Inst., 2005 IUCN Red List Ranking – Critically Endangered (CR D) Hawai‘i Natural Heritage Ranking ‐ Critically Imperiled (G1) Endemism – O‘ahu Critical Habitat ‐ Designated SPECIES INFORMATION: Urera kaalae, a long‐lived perennial member of the nettle family (Urticaceae), is a small tree or shrub 3 to 7 m (10 to 23 ft) tall. This species can be distinguished from the other Hawaiian species of the genus by its heart‐shaped leaves. DISTRIBUTION: Found in the central to southern parts of the Wai‘anae Mountains on O‘ahu. ABUNDANCE: The nine remaining subpopulations comprise approximately 40 plants. LOCATION AND CONDITION OF KEY HABITAT: Urera kaalae typically grows on slopes and in gulches in diverse mesic forest at elevations of 439 to 1,074 m (1,440 to 3,523 ft). The last 12 known occurrences are found on both state and privately owned land. Associated native species include Alyxia oliviformis, Antidesma platyphyllum, Asplenium kaulfusii, Athyrium sp., Canavalia sp., Charpentiera sp., Chamaesyce sp., Claoxylon sandwicense, Diospyros hillebrandii, Doryopteris sp., Freycinetia arborea, Hedyotis acuminata, Hibiscus sp., Nestegis sandwicensis, Pipturus albidus, Pleomele sp., Pouteria sandwicensis, Psychotria sp., Senna gaudichaudii (kolomona), Streblus pendulinus, Urera glabra, and Xylosma hawaiiense. THREATS: Habitat degradation by feral pigs; Competition from alien plant species; Stochastic extinction; Reduced reproductive vigor due to the small number of remaining individuals. CONSERVATION ACTIONS: The goals of conservation actions are not only to protect current populations, but also to establish new populations to reduce the risk of extinction.
    [Show full text]
  • Invasive Aphids Attack Native Hawaiian Plants
    Biol Invasions DOI 10.1007/s10530-006-9045-1 INVASION NOTE Invasive aphids attack native Hawaiian plants Russell H. Messing Æ Michelle N. Tremblay Æ Edward B. Mondor Æ Robert G. Foottit Æ Keith S. Pike Received: 17 July 2006 / Accepted: 25 July 2006 Ó Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2006 Abstract Invasive species have had devastating plants. To date, aphids have been observed impacts on the fauna and flora of the Hawaiian feeding and reproducing on 64 native Hawaiian Islands. While the negative effects of some inva- plants (16 indigenous species and 48 endemic sive species are obvious, other species are less species) in 32 families. As the majority of these visible, though no less important. Aphids (Ho- plants are endangered, invasive aphids may have moptera: Aphididae) are not native to Hawai’i profound impacts on the island flora. To help but have thoroughly invaded the Island chain, protect unique island ecosystems, we propose that largely as a result of anthropogenic influences. As border vigilance be enhanced to prevent the aphids cause both direct plant feeding damage incursion of new aphids, and that biological con- and transmit numerous pathogenic viruses, it is trol efforts be renewed to mitigate the impact of important to document aphid distributions and existing species. ranges throughout the archipelago. On the basis of an extensive survey of aphid diversity on the Keywords Aphid Æ Aphididae Æ Hawai’i Æ five largest Hawaiian Islands (Hawai’i, Kaua’i, Indigenous plants Æ Invasive species Æ Endemic O’ahu, Maui, and Moloka’i), we provide the first plants Æ Hawaiian Islands Æ Virus evidence that invasive aphids feed not just on agricultural crops, but also on native Hawaiian Introduction R.
    [Show full text]
  • The Political Status of the Native Hawaiian People
    The Political Status of the Native Hawaiian People Jon M. Van Dyke' More than 200,000 people now living in Hawai'i are descendants of the Polynesian people,' who had a thriving isolated culture in the Ha- waiian Islands until westerners started arriving at the end of the eight- eenth century. The Native Hawaiians3 "lived in a highly organized, self- sufficient, subsistent social system based on communal land tenure with a sophisticated language, culture, and religion., 4 Their self-sustaining economy was based on agriculture, fishing, and a rich artistic life in which they created colorful feathered capes, substantial temples, carved images, formidable voyaging canoes, tools for fishing and hunting, surf boards, weapons of war, and dramatic and whimsical dances." The newcomers t Professor of Law, William S.Richardson School of Law, University of Hawai'i at Manoa. B.A. cum laude, Yale University, 1964; J.D. cum laude, Harvard Law School, 1967. Professor Van Dyke has served as a resource person and consultant for the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) and other Native Hawaiian organizations seeking self-determination and control over their resources. The author would like to express his thanks to the past and present OHA Trus- tees for their encouragement and advice over the years, to Sherry P. Broder, Carl C. Chris- tensen, and Mark A. Levin for useful comments on earlier drafts of this Article, to Steven How- ard and Heather Stanton for their research assistance, and to Phil Spector for his ideas and assistance in preparing this Article for publication. The views expressed in this article are, how- ever, the author's own.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix A: Kahuama‘A Management Plan KAHUAMA‘A SEABIRD PRESERVE
    Appendix A: Kahuama‘a Management Plan KAHUAMA‘A SEABIRD PRESERVE MANAGEMENT PLAN PART OF THE KAUA‘I SEABIRD HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN Helen Raine, K. Yuki Reiss, Jessica Hallman Behnke (State of Hawai‘i, Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division of Forestry and Wildlife). Table of Contents 1. SUMMARY MANAGEMENT PLAN ................................................................................................................ 12 2. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................ 1 3. VISION STATEMENT ...................................................................................................................................... 3 4. INFORMATION .............................................................................................................................................. 3 4.1 LOCATION AND STATUTORY INFORMATION .................................................................................................................... 3 4.2 LEGAL STATUS (LEGISLATION FOR SITE CREATION, OWNERSHIP, OFFICIAL MANAGERS), MOA .................................................. 5 4.3 ACCESS .................................................................................................................................................................. 5 4.4 EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE ........................................................................................................................................ 5 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    THE JOURNAL OF THE POLYNESIAN SOCIETY VOLUME 127 No.3 SEPTEMBER 2018 VOICES ON THE WIND, TRACES IN THE EARTH: INTEGRATING ORAL NARRATIVE AND ARCHAEOLOGY IN POLYNESIAN HISTORY PATRICK VINTON KIRCH 2018 Nayacakalou Medal Recipient University of California, Berkeley The Polynesian peoples have long been noted for their propensity to encode the rich traditions of their ancestors in oral narrative accounts, often memorised by priests or other specialists, and passed down orally from generation to generation. Anthropologists refer to these as oral traditions, oral history or oral narratives, although they are also often categorised as “legend” or “myth”, terms that tend to dismiss their value as witnesses of real human affairs—that is to say, of history. In this lecture, I focus on a particular form of Polynesian oral narrative or oral history—one that is fundamentally chronological in its structure in that it is explicitly tied to a genealogical framework. Now I confess that I am not a specialist in oral tradition, a subject that is sometimes subsumed under the discipline of “folklore”. I am by training and by practice, over nearly half a century now, an archaeologist first and foremost. But I am also an anthropologist who believes in the holistic vision of that discipline as conceived by such disciplinary ancestors as Alfred Kroeber and Edward Sapir at the beginning of the 20th century. While this may make me something of a living fossil in the eyes of younger scholars who hew to narrower subdisciplinary paths, my holistic training and predilections incline me to see the value in working across and between the different branches of anthropology.
    [Show full text]
  • Caryophyllales: a Key Group for Understanding Wood
    Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society, 2010, 164, 342–393. With 21 figures Caryophyllales: a key group for understanding wood anatomy character states and their evolutionboj_1095 342..393 SHERWIN CARLQUIST FLS* Santa Barbara Botanic Garden, 1212 Mission Canyon Road, Santa Barbara, CA 93110, USA Received 13 May 2010; accepted for publication 28 September 2010 Definitions of character states in woods are softer than generally assumed, and more complex for workers to interpret. Only by a constant effort to transcend the limitations of glossaries can a more than partial understanding of wood anatomy and its evolution be achieved. The need for such an effort is most evident in a major group with sufficient wood diversity to demonstrate numerous problems in wood anatomical features. Caryophyllales s.l., with approximately 12 000 species, are such a group. Paradoxically, Caryophyllales offer many more interpretive problems than other ‘typically woody’ eudicot clades of comparable size: a wider range of wood structural patterns is represented in the order. An account of character expression diversity is presented for major wood characters of Caryophyllales. These characters include successive cambia (more extensively represented in Caryophyllales than elsewhere in angiosperms); vessel element perforation plates (non-bordered and bordered, with and without constrictions); lateral wall pitting of vessels (notably pseudoscalariform patterns); vesturing and sculpturing on vessel walls; grouping of vessels; nature of tracheids and fibre-tracheids, storying in libriform fibres, types of axial parenchyma, ray anatomy and shifts in ray ontogeny; juvenilism in rays; raylessness; occurrence of idioblasts; occurrence of a new cell type (ancistrocladan cells); correlations of raylessness with scattered bundle occurrence and other anatomical discoveries newly described and/or understood through the use of scanning electron microscopy and light microscopy.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix a Cultural Impact Assessment
    APPENDIX A CULTURAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT Volume II: Final Environmental Assessment CULTURAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument Management Plan November, 2008 STATE OF HAWAI‘I DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES December 2008 Appendix A Volume II: Final Environmental Assessment TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................3 1.1 Project Background .....................................................................................................3 1.2 Scope of Work ..............................................................................................................4 1.3 Physical and Natural Setting.......................................................................................4 2.0 TRADITIONAL AND HISTORIC BACKGROUND ....................................................8 2.1 Cultural Setting ............................................................................................................8 2.2 Historical Period ........................................................................................................11 2.3 Contemporary Connections to the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands ....................12 2.4 Cultural Access for Native Hawaiian Practices ......................................................13 3.0 MONUMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN ........................................................................13 4.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND ......................................................................16
    [Show full text]
  • Necker and Nihoa Islands - Northwestern Hawaiian Islands 09/07/2005 03:53 PM
    Necker and Nihoa Islands - Northwestern Hawaiian Islands 09/07/2005 03:53 PM Nihoa and Necker Islands By Dennis Kawaharada In 1822, Ka'ahumanu and a royal party including Kaumuali'i, Liholiho, Keopuokalani and Kahekili Ke'eaumoku, visited Ni'ihau and heard chants and stories about an island called Nihoa, to the west of Kaua'i, the direction from which the winter rains came: 'Ea mai ana ke ao ua o Kona, 'Ea mai ana ma Nihoa Ma ka mole mai o Lehua Ua iho a pulu ke kahakai The rain clouds of Kona come, Approaching from Nihoa, From the base of Lehua, Pouring down, drenching the coast. Intrigued, Ka'ahumanu organized an expedition and sailed in two or three boats under Captain William Sumner to visit the island. They landed on the once inhabited, but long deserted island 150 miles WNW of Kaua'i and annexed it to the Hawaiian kingdom. The waterfront area around Ka'ahumanu Street in Honolulu was named Nihoa in honor of the visit. The island was annexed to the Hawaiian Kingdom again by Kamehameha IV, who landed on the island in 1857. In 1885, Queen Lili'uokalani, with 200 excursionists, visited Nihoa on the steamer 'Iwalani, and brought back artifacts-a stone bowl, a stone dish, a coral rubbing stone, and a coral file (Emory 8-11). Nihoa, jutting up from the sea beyond sight of Kaua'i and Ni'ihau, is the westernmost place in this tradition of Kaua'i geography. It has come to stand for "one who bravely faces misfortune": "Ku paku ka pali o Nihoa i ka makani"-"The cliffs of Nihoa stand strongly against the wind" (Pukui, 'Olelo, No.
    [Show full text]
  • Keonehelelei - the Falling Sands
    Hawaiÿi Volcanoes National Park Island of Hawaiÿi UNCOVERING THE ORIGIN OF PRESERVED FOOTPRINTS AND ASSOCIATED KAÿÜ DESERT FEATURES: A HISTORICAL OVERVIEW AND ARCHEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE KAÿÜ DESERT by Jadelyn Moniz Nakamura, Ph.D. Pacific Island Cluster Publications in Anthropology #2 National Park Service 2003 U.S. Department of the Interior Keonehelelei - The Falling Sands Hawaiÿi Volcanoes National Park Archeological Inventory of the Footprints National Register By Jadelyn J. Moniz Nakamura, Ph.D. National Park Service Hawaiÿi Volcanoes National Park 2003 Keonehelelei... the falling sands ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At the request of the National Park Service (NPS), staff from the Research Corporation of the University of Hawaiÿi (RCUH) and Hawaiÿi Volcanoes National Park (HAVO) carried out an inventory survey of surface cultural remains. The survey took place within the Footprints National Register parcel, which covers approximately 4,284 acres. Located in the District of Kaÿü, on the Island of Hawaiÿi, Footprints lies within the ahupuaÿa (traditional land unit) of Kapäpala (TMK #399001001 and 398001001). The National Park Service nominated the Footprints area to the National Register of Historic Places in 1974. This area was nominated to the Register because of the presence of “fossilized” human footprints (State Site 50-10-61-5505) found in two layers of hardened desert ash. Archeologists carried out a survey of Footprints over a two-year period. Between August and December 1998 archeologist Warren Wulzen, B.A. directed Phase I of the survey. Two goals were identified by Wulzen for his project: 1) to “identify archaeological features in the Kaÿü desert;” and 2) to “record the frequency and location of fossil footprints in the volcanic ash deposits found in the area” (Wulzen unpubl.
    [Show full text]