I'ariaiioiis on the Groups. 3 



desirable to make a record of their existence and nature, and at the same time compare 

 them with other dwellings in our region. No limitation can be made to the stridlly 

 Polj'nesian tribes, for there is more difference between the Maori and Hawaiian houses, 

 both Polj'nesian, than between the Hawaiian and the New Caledonian, the latter the 

 work of a very different race. It will then be desirable, if not needful, to present to 

 the readers of this essaj' t\-pes of the principal forms of dwelling houses of the Pacific 

 islanders before entering upon the structure, uses and situation of the Hawaiian houses. 



FIG. I. VIEW OK HONOLULU IX 1837. 



Even where the material is the same, sticks and thatch, the ground plan varies between 

 island groups while on each group one form is predominant if not exclusive. Thus 

 on Hawaii, Fiji, Tahiti, New Zealand and New Guinea a rectangular plan prevailed, 

 on Samoa and Tonga the ellipse and in New Caledonia the circle were preferred. The 

 Hawaiians certainly built temples with a circular ground plan, but so far as can be 

 learned never a dwelling house. Single habitations were more common in the East, 

 communal in the West of the Pacific region, 3-et in Hawaii the hospitalit}- of the 

 people made their private home almost a caravansary. In some groups, as in Hawaii, 

 an establishment of a chief or well-to-do man consisted of several detached houses 

 each for an especial use ; in others there were houses ( or cages ) for girls of marriageable 



[187] 



