254 Foniaudcr Collection of Hazvaiian Folk-lore. 



thcni to New Zealand, occurs not only the well-known story of Maui-a-Kalana (RTaui- 

 o-Taranga) and his exploits by sea and land, and of his grandmother, who pulled out her 

 nails to furnish him with fire and who is called Mahu-ika — in the Hawaiian oenealogy 

 she is called Hina-AIahu-ia ; but there also occurs four ])rominent and comparatively 

 late names in the Hawaiian LHu and Hema line of descent, viz: Hema, Tawhaki 

 (Kahai), Wahieroa (Wahieloa) and Raka (Laka). In the New Zealand legends they 

 figure as chiefs and arikis of Hawaiki, following one another in the same succession as 

 in the Hawaiian genealogy. 



Thus, on New Zealand testimony, Hema, Kahai, Wahieloa and Laka were chiefs 

 of Hawaiki or Sawaii in the Samoan group, and not of Hawaii in this group. These 

 names and their ])edigrees must then have been carried from Hawaiki to Tahiti and 

 from Tahiti to this group, unless we assume a direct settlement from Hawaiki to Hawaii. 



It is true, certainly, that the Hawaiian legends ascribe a local habitation as well 

 as a name to each of these four chiefs, either on Maui, Oahu or Kauai, and places and 

 monuments connected with their names are existing to this day; yet, as there is no 

 reasonable probability that the New Zealanders took their departure from this group 

 instead of the Samoan, and as their evidence is positive as to the residence of these 

 chiefs in the Hawaiki which the>^ knew and from which the\- de])arted for New Zealand, 

 — I am forced to conclude that the connecting of their names with places in this group 

 was merely adaptation in after ages, an appropriation to Hawaiian soil, when the mem- 

 ory of the mother-country had become indistinct and when little if anything was known 

 of them exce])t the one main fact that thev stood on the g'enealogical list of the Hawaiian 

 chiefs, a fact, which was never allowed to be forgotten under the old system, however 

 much local associations may be forgotten or altered. 



It is hardly historically possible that there could have been two series of chiefs 

 in Hawaiki (Samoa) and Hawaii with identical names and in the same succession; 

 and, with one transposition onlv, the identity holds good also in the names of their 



wives — e. g. : 



New Zealand Hawaii 



Hema. Uru-tonga. Uciiia. L'hi-niahehoa. 



Tawhaki. lline-piripiri. Kahai. Hiiia-uluohia. 



Wahieroa. Kara. Wahieloa. Koolaukahili. 



Raka. Tonga Sautaw-hiri. Laka. Hikawaelena. 



I am justitied therefore in concluding that the L'lu-Hema line of chiefs was not indige- 

 nous to the Hawaiian Islands until after the time of Laka. But Laka was the third 

 from Llema who, by all the Ilawaiian traditions, was the brother of Puna-imua, and 

 consequently the contemporary of Paumakua on the Ulu-Puna line, and ]irobal)ly of 

 Mawcke or his father on the Nanaulu straight line. 



Whether the scions of these three lines, descending from Wakea and Pa])a, 

 arrived here about the same time, or whether the Puna and Maweke lines arrived at a 

 long interval frdin each other, or who had the ])recedence in the country, it is now 

 impossible to determine." That they came from the Samoan group, through the Tahitian 



"The Maweke line was long anlecedeiit to tlie Ulu descendants ; in fact may lie considered as the settlers of this 

 grunp, — about 1075. 



