Tonga's Nukuleka, the birth place of Polynesia

Veni, your assumption is correct about the "MARINES". They were/are warriors trained to fight on land and sea, even to this day and age... LOL

Peace...

Kaliavakatau wrote:

Lol, Its a waste of time to be arguing about something when you don't want to look at other evidence. Let's just drop it already. This is an old and stale topic. You've made up your mind and that's that, once the mind is closed, there isnt much to talk about. As I've said, I'd be glad to give the Tui Manua serious consideration, but the scholarly work out there is just too vague. You must understand that Polynesian oral history is always going to be dynamic, changing and unrealiable. Polynesian chiefs told different stories in ancient times depending on political motivation or maintaining power and status for future progeny. Instead of focusing on oral stories, a much better way to understand Polynesian history is through ancient concepts, or cultural beliefs passed down through many generations. The Tongan concept of 'Hau' or great champion is a strong indicator of centralized rule. It is a concept many Tongans understand today. Whereas the concept of 'Toa' or great warrior simply applies to one great warrior among many. In other words, it applies to a collective or group effort to overcome great odds. In truth, both concepts apply to modern versions of Tongan and Samoan mentality. Hope that sheds some light on the subject.

LOl whats wrong Kalia am I coming across information you wish I never did. I came across so many old History books of Tonga stating with no regret that original Kings of Tonga came from Eastern Samoa (Manu'a). I also found many books stating many original dances of Tonga came from Samoa. Sad thing about it is that as time goes by Tonga History slowly changes, almost as if Tonga is trying to seperate itself from having anything to do with SAMOA. The Kings no longer come from Eastern Samoa Manu'a etc.... The Taualuga & Ma'ulu'ulu are now considered full Tongan Dances without recognizing its origin from Samoa. Time goes by, jealousy arises, Tonga History changes lol.....

Palagi people asked Tongans in the past where they came from many stated the name Tui Manuka & the Manu'a Islands (Haamoa).

Palagi people asked Samoans in the past where did Samoans come from many stated the Manu'a Islands & (TAGALOA).

You get my drift lol

The concept of 'Tui' which means GREAT CHIEF or SPEAR or KING or THRUST, indicates Manu'as rulership throughout various islands and also indicated Manu'a as being the BIRTHPLACE OF MANY POLYNESIAN KINGS.

Example:

1) Pili son of Tagaloa leaves Manu'a starts Royal Tui Line in Upolu which was the Tui Atua & Tui Aana Lines etc.....(Pili was the son of Tui Manu'a)

2) Tongan woman, Va’epopua, of great noble birth has baby named Asoaitu or Ahoeitu with Tagaloa starting the Tui Line in Tonga.....(Ahoeitu or Asoaitu was the son of Tui Manu'a)

etc.......

Other Royal Lines started by Samoans/Manu'a:

Cook Islands - Makea Karika Kings
Hawaii - Kamehameha Kings descendened from Pili & Paao

So please cut the crap lol

Toa jealousy of what??? Tell me what does samoans have that tongans dont have???....... Let me put it to you dis way tongan people is a prideful people period!!! Toa is dis how you tlk to da tongan katz out there in sac?

myths versus studies with a mix of ignorance, ha ha ha.

hey guys, no one has yet proven that the study and artifacts from nukuleka are false to my knowledge.

Anyone who is in the know?? please I would like to hear, for or against I dont mind.

what the wrote:

myths versus studies with a mix of ignorance, ha ha ha.
hey guys, no one has yet proven that the study and artifacts from nukuleka are false to my knowledge.
Anyone who is in the know?? please I would like to hear, for or against I dont mind.

If I may recall the original evidence of Nukuleka, Archeologists clearly stated Tonga (MAY) be the birth place of Polynesia. Then a Tongan got hold of the article and blew it out of proportion lol come on ya get real Tonga birthplace of Polynesia over pottery found LMAO palagi people say look this pottery found in Tonga is the oldest so that must mean Tonga is the birthplace of Polynesia hahahahahah! Even your own people deny Nukuleka LMAO Dr Mahina even denies it lol who are Lapita people? Tell me that?

Phaircity wrote:

Toa jealousy of what??? Tell me what does samoans have that tongans dont have???....... Let me put it to you dis way tongan people is a prideful people period!!! Toa is dis how you tlk to da tongan katz out there in sac?

So you say Tonga people are prideful people period over what i wrote right? So is that your excuse to why alot of Tongan History changes?

Lol, Dr. Mahina never denied that Nukuleka, Tonga may be the origin of Polynesia, he simply stated that anthropologists and archeologists should also look at the cultural and oral traditions TOGETHER with Scientific studies to come to a better and fuller understanding of the mysteries behind the origin of Polynesia itself. Archaeologists, like Burley, Kirch and others have done extensive archeological work in both Tonga (Burley) and Samoa (Kirch) along with many others in the field. After collecting the evidence they confirmed that the Lapita people arrived in Tonga under what is considered Lapita migration phase I (Decorated Ceramic era-3000-2500 BP). At this time the Lapita people still knew how to decorate Lapita pottery, etc. As they develop a new culture, they move into LP migration phase II (Plainware era-2500-1500 BP), this is a period where pottery is no longer decorated, losing its ceremonial functions, its just plain pottery. Finally, comes the settlement era (1500-1000 BP) this is the era where the knowledge of making pottery is lost and is replaced by basket weaving, etc which leads to the pre-modern era (300-0 BP). BP* stands for Before Present, which is a radiocarbon date set at 1950. So 1950 is BP 0, and then count backwards. Nukuleka Radio Carbon date set at 3000 BP followed by Lapita sites across the Pacific.

Burley and Kirch confirm this as follows:

Radiocarbon dates from the Falevai site on Kapa Island illustrate an immediate loss of decorated
ceramics shortly after Lapita expansion into Vava’u. Estimated to fall in the interval 2750-2700 BP (Burley and Connaughton in press), this is approximately 100 to 150 years earlier than is projected for Ha’apai and Tongatapu (Burley 1998). Why this would be the case is diffcult to determine with any degree of certainty. Speculatively, geographic isolation and the effective number of potters are factors likely to be involved. Both Clark (1993) and Kirch (1993) associate Polynesian Plainware ceramics with early radiocarbon dates and the earliest settlement phase in Samoa. The Vava’u pattern, then, may not be in isolation, and possibly indicative
of a trend found in northward expansion to Samoa. Intermediate between Vava’u and Samoa is Niuatoputapu where a single early Eastern Lapita site occurs.

As you can see there is a pattern where the Lapita people moved up the Tongan Island chain, into Vavau and northward to Manua and Samoa. Again its just a theory, so dont go blaming me. Hope this helps us understand the research being done out there.

Lol, interesting how you bring up bogus royal lines already discredited.

Other Royal Lines started by Samoans/Manu'a:

Cook Islands - Makea Karika Kings
Hawaii - Kamehameha Kings descendened from Pili & Paao

My advice to you is please don't listen to any of the BS passed around by Peter Ah Ching, that fool has passed around more Samoan BS than I can count.

In his seminal work, "Ruling Families in Polynesia," Journal of Pacific History, Vol II, 6/98, Dr. Neil Gunnison documented hundreds of oral traditions throughout the Western Pacific. He made the following discovery.

"Legends also link Samoans with Hawaii. Pili is one common ancestor suggesting the antiquity of the link, though a more recent (and doubtful) Samoan myth efers to a migration to Samoa from Hawaii in the time of the Hawaiian king Umi
which would have been 23 generations before Kamehameha. The longer major lineages in Hawaii were claimed by Hawaiian informants in the 19th century to derive from the sacred kings of Gilolo in eastern Indonesia, hence Hawaiian names such as Molokai (cf. Indonesian Morotai).Some Polynesianists were quick to see 'Hawaii' as a transformation of Java, an identification made plausible by Roland Dixon's conclusion that the folklore motifs of Hawaii have more in common with Indonesian folklore than with any other region.

As you can see, it seems to be a continual pattern among some modern Samoans to continue to make bogus claims on other Polynesian islands that is simply false and untrue, or cannot be proven. I don't know why SOME Samoans like to do this. Maybe Mr. Toa can enlighten us on this strange Samoan cultural characteristic.(smiling)

Kaliavakatau wrote:

Lol, interesting how you bring up bogus royal lines already discredited.
Other Royal Lines started by Samoans/Manu'a:
Cook Islands - Makea Karika Kings
Hawaii - Kamehameha Kings descendened from Pili & Paao
My advice to you is please don't listen to any of the BS passed around by Peter Ah Ching, that fool has passed around more Samoan BS than I can count.
In his seminal work, "Ruling Families in Polynesia," Journal of Pacific History, Vol II, 6/98, Dr. Neil Gunnison documented hundreds of oral traditions throughout the Western Pacific. He made the following discovery.
"Legends also link Samoans with Hawaii. Pili is one common ancestor suggesting the antiquity of the link, though a more recent (and doubtful) Samoan myth efers to a migration to Samoa from Hawaii in the time of the Hawaiian king Umi
which would have been 23 generations before Kamehameha. The longer major lineages in Hawaii were claimed by Hawaiian informants in the 19th century to derive from the sacred kings of Gilolo in eastern Indonesia, hence Hawaiian names such as Molokai (cf. Indonesian Morotai).Some Polynesianists were quick to see 'Hawaii' as a transformation of Java, an identification made plausible by Roland Dixon's conclusion that the folklore motifs of Hawaii have more in common with Indonesian folklore than with any other region.
As you can see, it seems to be a continual pattern among some modern Samoans to continue to make bogus claims on other Polynesian islands that is simply false and untrue, or cannot be proven. I don't know why SOME Samoans like to do this. Maybe Mr. Toa can enlighten us on this strange Samoan cultural characteristic.(smiling)

LOL not so fast Kaliavakatau put your money where your mouth is lol I cant find that info you posted about Samoa & Hawaii anywhere could you please give me a link?

If I may recall in the 19th Century Hawaii King David Kalakaua wrote a book about Hawaiian History. In this book he clearly speaks of the lineages of Hawaii and stated the Kamehameha Line of Kings descendend from Pili & Paao of Upolu SAMOA. The Hawaiians know these 2 names Pili & Paao of Upolu Samoa like the back of their hand. Paao left Upolu due to conflicts with him and his brother Lonopele later summoning Pili to rule Hawaii research it Kaliavakatau Hawaiians even give the exact years Pili ruled Hawaii. This is apart of Hawaiian History.

Cook Islands History - Famous Manu'a Warrior/Navigator: Tui Manu'a Alia Matua who was known in the Cook Islands as Karika. He also left Samoa due to conflicts with his brother Tui Manu'a Alia Tama. This is also apart of Cook Islands History.

Do me this favor give me the link you got your info from and also research Cook Islands & Hawaii History and tell me if Im lying after? lol

TOA wrote:

<quoted text>
If I may recall the original evidence of Nukuleka, Archeologists clearly stated Tonga (MAY) be the birth place of Polynesia. Then a Tongan got hold of the article and blew it out of proportion lol come on ya get real Tonga birthplace of Polynesia over pottery found LMAO palagi people say look this pottery found in Tonga is the oldest so that must mean Tonga is the birthplace of Polynesia hahahahahah! Even your own people deny Nukuleka LMAO Dr Mahina even denies it lol who are Lapita people? Tell me that?

Toa, you tell me or show me where and how Dr Mahina denied Nukuleka as a possible birth place of Polynesia will start there.
Your post above has no content and does not help the question I posed with sincerity.

Lol, here you go kid:

To cite this Article Gunson, Niel(1997)'Great families of Polynesia: Inter-island links and marriage patterns',The Journal of Pacific
History,32:2,139 — 179

Its all there, all you need is access through an academic search portal through your university. It's not posted on-line because its a peer-reviewed academic source.

Gunnison claims the Samoa-Kamehameha story is a modern myth, much like many modern myths perpetuated by modern Samoans. Again, do not listen to Peter Ah Ching, most of what you spout are similar to what that non-academic fool has been saying for years. Just don't believe him, do the research on your own.

Lol, talk about irony, just saw this in my source folder. This is a recent news link explaining the possible connection between Hawaii and Tonga in ancient times.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/...

funny how Tongans never make a claim on founding any country other than our own, yet the archeological evidence shows a far closer connection to Tonga and Eastern Polynesia than previously thought. Unlike, ahem,*cough,*cough, some of our neighbors up North.(smiling)

Kaliavakatau wrote:

Lol, here you go kid:
To cite this Article Gunson, Niel(1997)'Great families of Polynesia: Inter-island links and marriage patterns',The Journal of Pacific
History,32:2,139 — 179
Its all there, all you need is access through an academic search portal through your university. It's not posted on-line because its a peer-reviewed academic source.
Gunnison claims the Samoa-Kamehameha story is a modern myth, much like many modern myths perpetuated by modern Samoans. Again, do not listen to Peter Ah Ching, most of what you spout are similar to what that non-academic fool has been saying for years. Just don't believe him, do the research on your own.

Kalia,

With all due respect...Gunson is and was NOT... King Kalakaua who professed that traditional and historical fact in his book. We did not bring that up. King Kalakaua did, and as the monarch as well as versed in Hawaiian genealogy...Kalakaua knew what he was talking about. If Leiataua Peter Ah Ching cited that....it didnt come from him either Kalia. David Malo and Samuel Kamakau, as well as Fornander had alot as well to say about that. As keepers of the culture....are you therefore trying to say that the Hawaiians didnt know their own history?

Did the make it up when in their own traditional accounts..oral history... they claim descent from Karika...Ali'a...from Manu'a...as King Fataiki and other chiefs who descend from this line and so forth...have stated. Are you saying they didnt know where they came from and what they were talking about...and also dont know their own history??

There are way more examples of SAMOAN connectivity, presence and influence around these other islands in the pacific. Why is it so difficult to accept?

Its laughable that you claim Le'iataua to be a "non-academic fool", when he is quite educated. lol

Lol, Kalakaua didnt write the book as published by Charles Tuttle Inc, it was a collection of myths collected by Samuel Kamaau and approved of by Kalakaua. No one disputes the fact that there was a migration from Samoa outwards to Eastern polynesia, etc and that tales and stories migrated along with the travelers. What academics look for is not just a single collection of myths, but the entire collection of myths, etc, gathered from a multitude of sources (anthropology, archeology, cultural studies, oral traditions, etc). As far as Hawaiian scholars go, this is what they are claiming:
HISTORY OF HAWAI'I AND HAWAIIANS
Copyright 2007 Dr. Thomas K. Kaulukukui, Jr.
Professor of Hawaiian Studies, University of Hawaii
Speech Delivered at Reception
National Museum of Pacific History

THE BEGINNING
In the beginning, there was the great darkness called po. So say my Hawaiian ancestors, and they told of this time in a chant called the kumulipo (the deep darkness where life began). This Hawaiian epic poem, which is over 2,000 lines long, tells of life forms evolving from simple forms to the sea creatures to mammals. Eventually, Hawaiian lore tells of gods who begat demi-gods who spawn human ancestors. But life began in the sea, and we Hawaiians are still salt-water people.

The God of the Heavens mated with the Earth Mother and she eventually gave birth to the islands of Hawai‘i. Another ancient story, deemed by many non-Hawaiians who hear it to be a quaint Hawaiian legend, tells of the demi-god Maui who goes fishing with his brothers, tosses his magic fishhook into the sea, and with it raises the islands. Fanciful? Perhaps...perhaps not. The story of Maui is a common old tale told and retold throughout Polynesia for ages, long before long-distance technology could account for the commonality of the story. Maui was a real voyager who traveled throughout the islands of the Pacific, a sailor of great renown deified for his deeds; hence, the commonality of the tale. He raised the islands the same way sailors have always raised islands, by sailing towards it until the land rises from the sea above the horizon. And in Maui's case, he guided by the magic fishhook of the heavens, the constellation Scorpio, known as Ka Makau Nui o Maui (The Great Fishook of Maui). The story of Maui is a tale of discovery, not creation.
So we have Hawaiians and the Hawaiian islands. We, the people of the sea, and Hawai‘i, islands of the sea. How did we Hawaiians come to inhabit our fair islands? It took three (3) Cs: courage, competency, and canoes. Our ancient ancestors from the Africa and Asia to the west pushed eastward into Oceania and island-hopped into the South Pacific. Eventually, they ran out of islands when they reached French Polynesia and then Easter Island. Then a brave, intrepid soul named Hawai‘i-Loa turned his eyes north and gazed into the vast reaches of the mid-Pacific, towards the most remote islands of the globe: the Hawaiian Islands.
The first migration to Hawai‘i occurred about 400 or 500 A.D., when sailors who were likely from the Marquesas Islands populated the islands. Around 1100 or 1200 A.D., there was a second migration of voyagers, perhaps from Tahiti. Imagine the courage and competency that was required to sail voyaging canoes to these tiny islands, without sextants, or compasses, or other such navigational devices. Our ancestors did it because they were people of the sea, island people. We still are.

This is the record as gathered by modern Hawaiians versed in their own cultural history and presenting to the world. Academics would later find other stories tying in the connection to Indonesia, etc.

As for Peter Ah Ching, I find a lot of problems with his theories on the origin of Polynesia because its mostly speculation and conjecture. Furthermore, he has no background in genetics yet makes outrageous claims on how DNA of Polynesias point to Samoan origins (LMAO). Yes, he may have RECEIVED a western education, but his works are far fetched and that's probably why the community of scholars have never invited him to present his papers in a academic review conference for a good reason.

In regards to Kalakaua, he never wrote a book on Hawaiian myths and legends, he allowed Samuel Kama'au to collect the myths and have it published by the Charles Tuttle company on his behalf. There is no dispute that ancient Samoans migrated to Eastern Polynesia and as they traveled, so did their myths and stories. However, Hawaiians have collected the stories of their people for many generations and I leave it to them to tell it anyway they like as follows:

HISTORY OF HAWAI'I AND HAWAIIANS
Copyright 2007 Dr.Thomas K. Kaulukukui, Jr.
Chair of Hawaiian Studies, University of Hawaii
Speech Delivered at Reception
National Museum of American Indian
Washington, D.C.
April 12, 2007

THE BEGINNING
In the beginning, there was the great darkness called po. So say my Hawaiian ancestors, and they told of this time in a chant called the kumulipo (the deep darkness where life began). This Hawaiian epic poem, which is over 2,000 lines long, tells of life forms evolving from simple forms to the sea creatures to mammals. Eventually, Hawaiian lore tells of gods who begat demi-gods who spawn human ancestors. But life began in the sea, and we Hawaiians are still salt-water people.

The God of the Heavens mated with the Earth Mother and she eventually gave birth to the islands of Hawai‘i. Another ancient story, deemed by many non-Hawaiians who hear it to be a quaint Hawaiian legend, tells of the demi-god Maui who goes fishing with his brothers, tosses his magic fishhook into the sea, and with it raises the islands. Fanciful? Perhaps...perhaps not. The story of Maui is a common old tale told and retold throughout Polynesia for ages, long before long-distance technology could account for the commonality of the story. Maui was a real voyager who traveled throughout the islands of the Pacific, a sailor of great renown deified for his deeds; hence, the commonality of the tale. He raised the islands the same way sailors have always raised islands, by sailing towards it until the land rises from the sea above the horizon. And in Maui's case, he guided by the magic fishhook of the heavens, the constellation Scorpio, known as Ka Makau Nui o Maui (The Great Fishook of Maui). The story of Maui is a tale of discovery, not creation. But it's neither the first nor the last time that our native stories or history has been misunderstood or trivialized.

So we have Hawaiians and the Hawaiian islands. We, the people of the sea, and Hawai‘i, islands of the sea. How did we Hawaiians come to inhabit our fair islands? It took three (3) Cs: courage, competency, and canoes. Our ancient ancestors from the Africa and Asia to the west pushed eastward into Oceania and island-hopped into the South Pacific. Eventually, they ran out of islands when they reached French Polynesia and then Easter Island. Then a brave, intrepid soul named Hawai‘i-Loa turned his eyes north and gazed into the vast reaches of the mid-Pacific, towards the most remote islands of the globe: the Hawaiian Islands.

These early Polynesian explorers built sturdy voyaging canoes and sallied forth into the Pacific, guiding by the stars. The first migration to Hawai‘i occurred about 400 or 500 A.D., when sailors who were likely from the Marquesas Islands populated the islands. Around 1100 or 1200 A.D., there was a second migration of voyagers, perhaps from Tahiti. Imagine the courage and competency that was required to sail voyaging canoes to these tiny islands, without sextants, or compasses, or other such navigational devices. Our ancestors did it because they were people of the sea, island people. We still are.

Lol, you say let the Hawaiians tell their own story? I just did.(smiling)

sorry for the double post.

Kaliavakatau LMAO all of this info of Samoa History sounds surprising to you Kalia lol. It seems to me that your Tongan people filled your head up with so much prideful stories of Tonga this Tonga that lol that it made you think Tonga were the only people who ruled other islands am I right? Dont worry though my friend I am going to help you fill in the missing pieces your people tend to leave out LMAO and where do you get the idea Hawaii King David Kalakaua didnt write his own book?

(This information is stored at the Hawaii State Archives).

The Hawaiian King himself proclaims the Kamehameha lineage back to the Ali'i chief from Samoa, brought over by a high priest named Pa'ao from Samoa. The Hawaiian King clearly identifies which ruling chief families descended from Tahiti, Society islands, Marquesas and the chiefs who ruled big island Hawai'i from Samoa which were Pili & Paao. Paao of Samoa was the founder of the High Priest Families in Hawaii while Pili of Samoa ruled Hawaii & was the ancestor of KINGS. Samoans weren't the only ones who landed in Hawaii but Samoans did rule Hawaii and started the Kamehameha Line Of Kings.

Dont believe me buy the book & read it a lot of Hawaii History is written in this book.

The book is called: The Legends and Myths of Hawaii: The Fables and Folk-Lore of a Strange People (Author: Hawaii King David Kalakaua).

You said let the Hawaiians tell there stories I will. Kaliavakatau did you know that Samuel Kama'au is a known and respected Hawaiian Scholar?

Kalia do me this favor and just read the book, you will learn alot about Hawaiian History. Also research Pili & Paao of Samoa then come back and talk to me OK lol

Masina I was wondering if the Pili who left Upolu to rule Hawaii was the same Pili who left Manu'a to rule Upolu?

Kaliavakatau wrote:

sorry for the double post.

yes Kalia...your double post is getting the eyes a bit gegefu...lol

Lol TOA, dont tell me, Im well aware of the story behind Pili and Paao. Again, all Im saying is that you have to look at collective Hawaiian stories and traditions. Im also saying let the Hawaiians revise their oral history if they want, its THEIR history not yours! If modern Hawaiians share an affinity with Tahiti and the Marquesas, let them, its none of your business. lol, Im also aware of the myths of Pele and its connection to both Eastern Polynesia and Samoa, so dont go blaming me. However, what I am interested in is an observation made by Janet Mageo, a leading Samoan anthropologists, who makes the following point in an article, "Zones of ambiguity":

"Samoans tend to boast about their families’ status. They do so via two primary arguments: &#64257;rst, they are related to high titles, meaning that their genealogy is exalted, second, they come from a big family. An extended family’s prowess relies upon itsnumbers: all able-bodied members serve as their chief’s militia. The nineteenth-
century missionary George Turner (1984 [1884]: 173) says that Samoans occasionally gave family titles to a stranger ‘merely for the sake of drawing him in, to increase the numerical strength of the family’. In old Samoa, this meant that it was in the interestsof high-status families to acknowledge children begotten on a malaga.The girl,her child, and some of her relatives might come to reside on the boy’s family estate multiplying his chief’s retainers. If the girl had a son who was clever and serviceable, he might receive a minor title in his father’s family; if he married well, his child would have a respectable genealogy along paternal and maternal lines."

I now understand why some Samoans want to claim bogus lineage to other Islands. It makes a lot of sense.

Sorry for the eyesores Masina. Peace.