Forum

Anglo Saxon spin on the Monk Seals brought to the islands have fishermen and the local people pissed off.  Not just the science, or the relocation of monks to Hawaii--it's the stealing and excerpts from our Kumulipo in their science research and the spins that 'junk' science would do to fame their spin on layers of lies, or waves of lies and fantasies.  

One can read his spin on the Monk seal and his interpretation and believe it and retell it over and over by 'lolo heads'  until the lies are embedded into our hearts and minds-- to whereas we begin to worship the masters of the seals and turn them into living gods, because we that stupid!

Our research also involved an exhaustive search in Native Hawaiian language newspapers for
references to the Hawaiian monk seal. Newspaper searches were conducted in online databases
of published and searchable newspapers (Ulukau, 2003, Alu Like Inc. et al., 2006). The
Hawaiian-language newspapers are an unparalleled resource in terms of the volume of material
and richness of description provided by Native Hawaiian contributors (Nogelmeier, 2010a), and
only ~10% of published newspapers have been electronically scanned and made searchable
(Nogelmeier, 2010b). As part of the search process, a list of Hawaiian language terms for the
monk seal was developed and the etymology of these terms was investigated. All references
were translated into English, categorized in terms of the type of account (e.g. fishing story,
legend, chant, prayers, etc.) and then analyzed, resulting in an interpretation of each account and
its meaning or significance in Native Hawaiian culture.
We also conducted unstructured ethnographic and oral history interviews with 30 Native
Hawaiian community members, cultural practitioners and elders (kūpuna). Respondents
involved in the research were known to possess extensive knowledge of endemic Hawaiian
species, marine and coastal environments, and historic and contemporary cultural practices or
knowledge that may have some association with monk seals. Interviews focused on historical
and contemporary cultural connections with the monk seal among Native Hawaiian
communities, as determined through respondents’ oral testimonies or reported statements about
past and current relationships with the species. These oral traditions consist of a rich pool of
collective memories among that encompass an inherited culture in Native Hawaiian communities
(Kikiloi, 2010). Respondents were identified through a social network sampling process
(Hanneman, 2001), which allowed us to identify and characterize interviewees who are
particularly knowledgeable of or experienced with monk seals or Native Hawaiian cultural
knowledge systems (cf. Romney et al., 1986).
Interviewees were comprised of respondents who exhibited a broad and sometimes conflicting
range of views on the monk seal. This purposive sampling of respondents allowed us to
characterize a multiplicity of perspectives among community members, which can reveal
different values and information that exist in different social groups and knowledge systems
(Shackeroff et al., 2011). The interview methods used by the researchers followed existing
standards in social science research (Bernard, 2006, Kvale, 1996, Seidman, 1998). Interviews
were conducted in a manner that was culturally appropriate and which respected the traditional
ecological knowledge systems of the respondents (Shackeroff and Campbell, 2007).
Interview data were analyzed using an iterative approach to describe, categorize and interpret our
qualitative interview data. Most interviews were audio- or video-recorded and, together with 10
notes taken during the interviews, responses were coded into topical categories. We adopted an
iterative methodology that is utilized commonly in grounded theory approach, a method that
allows the researcher to develop theory on the research topics addressed while simultaneously
grounding the results in empirical observations or data (Glaser and Strauss, 1967, Schatzman,
1991, Thomas and James, 2006). Our methods, however, focused more on an inductive analysis
to systematically determine patterns in our respondents’ narratives rather than on theory
generation. The iterative methodology employed was designed to establish rigor in the analysis
of our qualitative information (Baxter and Eyles, 1997, Barbour, 2001).
In addition to interviews, we also sought other evidence of monk seals in Native Hawaiian
cultural knowledge, including Hawaiian historical accounts, chants (oli) songs (mele), prayers
(pule), existing oral histories, place names, and other traditional and customary knowledge
forms. We also engaged in other ethnographic research methods including site visits and
participant observation in Hawaiian communities and places with names potentially referencing
monk seals.
Results
Our research uncovered a diversity of information about historical and contemporary
relationships between Hawaiian communities and the monk seal. Below, we discuss our findings
discovered through different sources and research efforts. Additional material referenced in these
sections is included in the Appendix. It should be noted that although our research included a
comprehensive search of sources of cultural knowledge, additional information may still be
waiting to be discovered in extant Hawaiian literature and traditional knowledge forms. In
addition to this, several respondents also noted that much of the information we sought about
monk seals was deliberately kept hūnā, or secret, in keeping with tradition and because such
knowledge had been improperly used in the past.
English-Language Archival Sources
The results of archival research in English language sources have been published elsewhere
(Watson et al., 2011), but a brief overview of these findings and additional description is
provided here for context and comparison with other research results. Our research in this
diverse set of sources suggests that seal populations were probably locally extirpated in the MHI
within the first century after Polynesian settlement (~AD 1250-1350). Pre-human seal
populations probably never exceeded 15,000 individuals, which constitutes a small and
vulnerable population for a large mammal (Watson et al., 2011). Remains of monk seals in
archaeological deposits are limited to just a few sites that primarily date to the historic period
(Rechtman, 2011, Office of Hawaiian Affairs, 2010, Rosendahl, 1994), but this evidence
suggests that monk seals were opportunistically taken by prehistoric Polynesian hunters. Though
several theories still exist, the most likely explanation based on the available evidence is that seal
populations were probably rapidly diminished in Hawaiian prehistory by human hunters and
harassment by their commensal mammals (particularly dogs [Canis familiaris]).11
One of the periods that is the least well understood are the first decades after western contact
before the Hawaiian language was translated into a written form (AD 1778-1830). During this
period, whaling, sealing and other trading vessels increasingly frequented the archipelago and
trade between Hawaiian communities and foreigners intensified (Ii, 1993, Kamakau, 1992).
Hawaiians became involved in the seal trade as early as 1811 (Ii, 1993), and were conscripted as
sailors on whaling and sealing vessels by Hawaiian monarchs (Naughton, 1983, Beechert, 1991,
Kuykendall, 1938, Kuykendall, 1957). This period also witnessed major changes in the
relationship between commoners and the land, including the abolishment of the traditional
Hawaiian religious system (Ralston, 1984, Seaton, 1974), which included restrictions on some
marine species (Titcomb, 1972, Beckley, 1883).
Despite several detailed English-language accounts of the Hawaiian Islands that date to this
period, no descriptions of seals were recorded in the main Hawaiian Islands (Appendix). This
strongly suggests rarity, particularly given many early descriptions come from whalers and
sealers that would have been interested in harvesting seals for their oil, or from explorers and
naturalists who described other social and environmental contexts in great detail. Of these early
descriptions, however, it remains difficult to disentangle which sealing cargoes were derived
from ventures outside of Hawaiian waters (e.g. Alaska, the Pacific Northwest, and the California
coast) and those which may have been comprised of monk seal populations from Hawaiian
waters (Kuykendall, 1929). When seals were discovered several decades later in the remote and
uninhabited northwestern Hawaiian Islands, several sealing voyages were undertaken (Cobb,
1905). Seals were also taken opportunistically in the NWHI during this period by visiting ships,
including ones bearing Hawaiian monarchs (e.g. Anonymous, 1857). Few monk seals survived
the sealing ventures of the 19
th
century, resulting in near-extinction and extreme rarity
throughout the archipelago in the early 20
th
century (Hiruki and Ragen, 1992).
Hawaiian-Language Newspapers
The Hawaiian-language newspapers are an unparalleled resource in terms of the volume of
material and richness of description (Nogelmeier, 2010a). Our search consisted of identifying
Hawaiian terms for monk seals and the etymology of these terms. Next, we located articles
containing these terms in online databases of digitized Hawaiian-language newspapers (Ulukau,
2003, Alu Like Inc. et al., 2006) and translated these accounts (Appendix).
We discovered many terms for monk seals in our search in Hawaiian-language dictionaries,
archives and newspapers, including: ‘īlioholoikauaua, ‘ioleholoikauaua, ‘īlioholoikauaua-aLono, ‘īlioheleikauaua, ‘īlioholoikekai, ‘aukai, holoikauaua, hulu, sila, and kila (Table 1). The
most commonly used term, ‘īlioholoikauaua, roughly translates to “dog running in the rough
[seas]” (Pūkui and Elbert, 1986). Two other commonly referenced terms, “sila” and “kila,” are
Hawaiian versions of the word ʻseal,’ and probably date to the post-contact era. Several
previously unknown terms were also discovered, including “hulu,” which is defined in an earlier
dictionary as “seal, named for its valuable fur” (Pūkui and Elbert, 1971). This term was also
used by some respondents in interviews to reference monk seals (Watson, 2010). Another term
“ohulu,” is defined as a seal hunter (Parker, 1922). The term “palaoa” commonly references
whales, but in a traditional chant, it may also apply to other marine mammals including monk
seals (Nerveza 2010). Some respondents knew of other names for the monk seal, but declined to 12
provide the names because of worries about how the names would be used. A full list of Native
Hawaiian terms for monk seals and their meanings is provided in Table 1.
Most references to monk seals in Hawaiian-language newspapers use the term ‘īlioholoikauaua
and date to the mid to late 19
th
century (Appendix). References to monk seals are primarily used
in a neutral tone with little description. For example, writers used the term ‘īlioholo-ikauaua to
reference seals in translations of English works. Other descriptions use the same term to
describe seals on sealing voyages to Alaska and the US Pacific northwest on which Native
Hawaiians served as crew members. One writer describes a trip to the arctic where the crew
were kept warm by “the pelt of the ‘īlio-holo-i-ka-uaua and the other slippery, furry animals,”
while another writer describes the Arctic as “Just snow is what is seen there, no plants; the polar
bear is still important, with the ‘īlioholoikauaua, and the sea elephants.” Other writers used the
term ‘īliokai or ‘īlio o kai (seadog) and sila (seal) in descriptions of sealing expeditions. “These
accounts provide little information about the cultural relationship with monk seals but do provide
evidence that the name was known to Hawaiian writers during a time in which seals were rare in
the Hawaiian Islands. Other references are more telling of cultural relationships, and several
contain negative connotations. For example, one writer implores fellow Hawaiians not to
“slacken in their moral resolve like the ‘īlioholoikauaua,” and another writer uses the term
loosely as an insult (Appendix). These references provide some evidence that the monk seal was
not always viewed in a positive manner, though the context does not provide enough description
in order to determine why these views were held.
The Hawaiian language newspapers also provide some evidence that monk seals were harvested
and consumed as part of customary practice. For example, one writer writes in a story “what are
the things you think we eat here? Turtle liver, shark fin, and the broiled meat of the
‘īlioholoikauaua.” Another writer suggests that monk seal furs were collected as part of
customary tribute to the land managers (Konohiki), writing, “and then, they lay down these
things the Konohiki (land manager) requested: pig, dog, cloth, fiber, fur (‘o ka hulu), fishing net,
everything. These are the goods that we exhibited in ancient days” (Appendix). These
descriptions, though limited, suggest that monk seals were harvested for their meat and fur.13
Table 1
Term Definition Reference / Notes
‘īlioholoikauaua Seal, dog running in the
roughness [rough seas]
Pūkui and Elbert, 1986 / entry does
not appear in the online dictionary
(Ulukau, 2003)
‘ioleholoikauaua* A rat running beside the
wave
Beckwith, 1951
‘īlioholoikauaua-a-Lono The dog running at the
voice of Lono
Fornander, 1916-1920 (Vol. IV, pg.
273) / Only known reference
‘īlioheleikauaua The dog running in the
waves
Andrade, 2008
‘īlioholoikekai The dog running in the sea Mo‘olelo (oral traditions) from
kūpuna and kumu (elders &
teachers)
‘aukai Seafaring Mo‘olelo (oral traditions) from
kūpuna (elders)
holoikauaua "iʻoa Pearl and Hermes
Reef [NWHI]. Lit.,
[Hawaiian monk seal that]
swims in the rough."
Kōmike Huaʻōlelo (2003)
hulu seal, named for its valuable
fur
Pūkui and Elbert, 1971
sila / kila Hawaiian versions of the
English word ‘seal.’
Kōmike Huaʻōlelo (2003) / It is
probable that use of this term did not
begin until after foreign contact
ohulu (ō-hū'-lu) “O, to spear; and hulu, fur
or feathers. A seal hunter.”
Parker, 1922 / Entry does not appear
in the online dictionary (Ulukau,
2003)
he ilio o ke kai Seal Andrews, 1865
sila pūhuluhulu Fur seal Kōmike Huaʻōlelo (2003)
sila Hawai‘i Hawaiian monk seal Kōmike Huaʻōlelo (2003)
‘īliopi‘i “Dog running up and down”;
Place name: cape & bay,
Kalaupapa peninsula
Hawaiian language newspapers;
maps
Table 1: Native Hawaiian terms for the monk seal. Definitions and references are
provided, including information derived from other archival and interview research
efforts on these terms.
* There have been several changes in the definitions of some terms in Hawaiian language
dictionaries over time (Elbert, 1954). For the term ‘iole, one edition of the Hawaiian dictionary
defines the term as, “‘iole. 1. Hawaiian rat (Rattus exulans); introduced rat, mouse (Oink.
11.29); rodent (see ‘iole-lāpaki, ‘iole-manakuke, ‘iole-pua‘a); mole (Isa. 2.20). hō‘iole. To
behave like a rat. Fig., to steal, cheat, lie in wait in order to assail. 2. Name for a sinker of a
squid lure.” (Pūkui and Elbert, 1971). A later edition of the same dictionary contains the
following definition, “ʻiole n. 1. Hawaiian rat (Rattus exulans); introduced rat, mouse (Oihk.
11.29); rodent (see ʻiole lāpaki, ʻiole manakuke, ʻiole puaʻa); mole (Isa. 2.20); considered by
some an ʻaumakua. Cf. piko pau ʻiole, haumakaʻiole, paʻipaʻiʻiole, papaʻiole, ʻuwīʻuwī 3. hō.ʻiole
To behave like a rat; ratlike. Fig., to steal, cheat, lie in wait in order to assail. (PNP kiole)” (Pūkui
and Elbert, 1971, emphasis added). The reason for the change in definition is unknown, but 14
noteworthy in that the later definition specifies that the animal is known to be an ʻaumakua.
‘Aumakua are “family or personal gods, deified ancestors who might assume the shape
of…[various animals]” (Pūkui and Elbert, 1986).