I’ve just updated the Lahaina LCA Awards file to include part of Vol. 15 and 16, both of which are later (1852+) claims, many of which were in Lahaina, so there is substantial new material in this file now. Enjoy and share.

I have just completed the transcription of all the Foreign Testimony sections of Volume 14 and it is up (and ready for download) at the Mahele page. I also reorganized the downloads so the completed volumes (1, 7-8, 14) show up first and then the working files for the Google Earth pages (Waititi and Lahaina). Enjoy and please download and use.

I just completed the transcription of the Foreign Testimony volume 8, though the latter part is actually part of Native Testimony so will have to wait till I have a lot of free time for both transcription and translation. As is common in many volumes there are also a number of locations from West Maui and the Big Island actually in this volume. Remember that since they are now in pdf format. all these transcriptions can be searched for word or number.

As I noted in my last post, Lahaina has gone through a number of transformations just in the last 200 years.  I want to contribute my analysis on the gradual (but predictable) shift from plantation support/services center (Pioneer Mill 1850-1960); to tourism services/entertainment center 1960+); to the tourism services residential community of 2023.

Typical of all the plantation centers in Hawai’I, the geographical layout of the plantation was centered around two main elements: the mill (the sugar/money generator) and the mill offices (management).  Radiating out from this were the residential satellites of the plantation, in a very visually and spatially defined pattern-the most visible element being the residences of the owners/managers, second that of supervisors/lunas/technical staff, lastly (in all ways) the residences of the field work force.  While not unique to Hawai’I, it’s important to remember that Hawai’I came late to the ‘plantation game’, and as such tended to be very standardized in both layout and production.  The Lahaina mills were almost the only partial exception in that Lahaina (and Lahainaluna School) already existed, so Pioneer Mill and related facilities were pushed away from the town center.  Lahaina’s function during the sugar plantation period was that of support and services to the surrounding community, though more for the elites (managers/supervisors) as they had available cash, in contrast to the field work force (many of whom were essentially penniless).

As the sugar plantations closed many of the satellite communities shrank or disappeared, as the work force either left by choice (elites) or in a continuing struggle to make ends meet (field work force), dramatically expanding the service sector work force.  This was one motivator for the development of enclave tourism (Kaanapali especially) in the 1960+ period, as sugar became replaced with tourists: plantation mills with hotels/resorts; cane fields with golf courses; sugar production with activities and entertainment, all fueled by the cheap labor of the former field work force.  So the work force moved from sugar harvesting to tourism-based service sector jobs.  But the rapid explosion of the tourism enclaves quickly expanded demands beyond the existing potential work force and as a result a new migrant service-sector population moved in, many initially temporary.  This was detailed specifically for Maui in Bryan Farrell’s Hawaii, the Legend That Sells (1982), that predicted almost all the socio-economic issues plaguing Hawaii today.  It is telling that you rarely see the work cited nor his analysis examined, as it was highly critical of the dependence of tourism as our single industry and even more so about the State of Hawaii’s dependence on the tourism growth model (think DBEDT and HTA here).  This has recently been illustrated by the State and Maui County reopening of tourism ahead of the initial plans due to the economic dependency on this industry. 

Lahaina’s position had become that of a service-sector work force community to service the needs of both surrounding resorts (Kaanapali, Kapalua, Napili…) and the ‘gentlemen farmer’ enclaves that have taken over the same space formerly occupied by plantation communities and in many cases developed by the successors to the plantations (who still control much of the water in West Maui), further compressing the low-income service labor force into Lahaina.  In many cases as rentals, as they have no ability to afford the high costs of housing on Maui-a factor Farrell noted over 40 years ago.  Any re-envisioning of Lahaina post-fire is going to have to examine this reality in all its unattractive detail, something the State and Counties have been loath to do.  The tension currently rising on Maui over the future of Lahaina is reflective of all of the islands, but the choices made (especially at the State and County levels) will affect all of us in Hawai’i Nei.

I have a very long summation of Farrell’s analysis which I will post-with apologies, but his work is impossible to find in print and I see no attempt to provide e-book versions.  I would just note that when he wrote the work Maui was looking potentially at 2m visitors/year and the concerns about their impact-prior to the fire Maui was looking at possibly 3m+ visitors/year, so his analysis is even more relevant given the growth and increased dependence on this industry.

Much of the current dialog about what to make Lahaina into (or back into) refers to “what was”, or the past.  Especially in Lahaina’s case this is a very complex issue, as Lahaina has gone through a number of transformations just in the last 200 years.  From regional center (Kahekili-1770s); to the economic and political center of the Hawaiian State (Lahainaluna-1820-30’s); to plantation support/services center (Pioneer Mill 1850-1960); to tourism services/entertainment center 1960+); to tourism services residential community (2000+).

We are unique in that the Mahele of 1846-1853 required testimony of all claimants, and that testimony required a number of details including neighbors, land use, how/when the land was acquired, and of course the boundaries.  This was done for the entire Kingdom in just a few years, and for all the flaws it provides a unique historic snapshot of this transitional period in Hawaiian social history.  The only major study I know of to take advantage of the Mahele is the work that Marshall Sahlins and Pat Kirch did in their analysis of the Ahupua’a of Anahulu (The Anthropology of History 1992, 2 volumes).

We are attempting to provide some of this detail with our Google Earth Mahele project, and if you go to the website you will see the current files for Lahaina (West Maui) we have incorporated most of the Foreign Testimony text and embedded it into the locations (as best we can).  A great deal of work still needs to be done in analyzing the testimony, and of course in integrating the Native Testimony, which includes the majority of the Lahaina testimony.  Doing so will bring into focus a detailed picture of land use, social networks, formal and informal patterns of land control-all of which will provide a detailed picture of much of Lahaina when it was still the other social and political center in the Hawaiian Kingdom.

The material is available—all the Mahele testimony has been scanned in and put online by AvaKonohiki and can be downloaded.  We have posted all the completed transcriptions we have done on the website and again they can be downloaded.  It’s up to you to do the analysis and build this picture of Lahaina in 1852, and from that provide a foundation for re-envisioning Lahaina in the 2020s.

First just a note-I have added some of the Vol. 16 Lahaina testimony to the Lahaina Awards in Google Earth, so you can download the update to that file.

As I slog through v. 16 (mixed Hawaiian/English) I come across small pieces that show what a complex world it was in the 1850s as the Mahele sorted out.  I’ve never seen a good analysis of the fact that all of the sudden the Poalima (land cultivated by maka’ainana for konohiki/chiefs) just ceased to exist, and to make it even more complicated, Poalima were apparently considered Govt. land, so all of the sudden little bits and pieces of lo’i and dryland, usually embedded in now privately-owned land, were frequently auctioned off.  I suspect a significant part of the ‘adverse possession’ claims which plagued maka’ainana through the 1930’s probably started here.  Also, I’m starting to realize (at least on Maui) that a significant number of Konohiki by the 1840’s were haole, some (like Gower) who became rather infamous for their abuse of power.  Also you get some evidence of the stress for maka’ainana in a system where they had no realistic recourse (such as a working legal system) by which they could fight abuses of power.

5176 B  Kaleo claimant    Koali Hana, Aug. 19, 1854

Claimant appeared in person before E. Bailey and said that the Konohiki had one Loi Poalima in his Mauka lot which Mr. Turner did not take out when he surveyed said lot, but it belongs to Mr. Whittlesey the Konohiki. (v. 16/106)

4838  Kaihe  claimant    Wananalua  Aug. 23, 1854

Claimant appeared in person before E. Bailey and said that did not willing by relinquish his claim to Kuakamauna the Konohiki, but that he was induced to do so by various threats of the Konohiki.

Decided it is not given up. (v. 16/107)

I have added two new files available for both viewing and download. The first is a useful listing of all the LCA claims for the moku of Lahaina from the Mahele index-while nothing new, it is searchable through Adobe so may prove useful to some. The second is a compilation of the various claims made by the Government to property both in Lahaina moku and Waititi moku, both for the government and also the various lands given to (or given up) by the various high chiefs in the Mahele. This has several interesting aspects, one being the patterns of claims by various chiefs. A minor puzzle is the large number of lands claimed by the Government as “Fort” lands in Waititi, which is somewhat odd given that the only true “fort” installations were around Honolulu harbor. Both of these files are in the Mahele land tab.

I have just completed adding the available testimony from LCA Foreign Test. v. 7 (West Maui) to our available LCA maps, which are limited to Lahaina and Olowalu. This is the “LCA Awards Lahaina District” kmz file which can be found in the Palolo-Waititi Project tab. As we go through related volumes we should be able to add more completed testimony to the map.