Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 13, Number 7, 1 July 1996 — Nā waihona mea la'a [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

Nā waihona mea la'a

bv Kina'u Boyd Kamali'i Trustee-at-Iarge This past April, OHA was informed that the Roger Williams Museum - a small eounty parks facility in Providence, Rhode Island - meant to sell a ki'i lā'au whjch had been "collected" in the Islands and taken to the East Coast before 1825. Described as a "support figure", this ki'i was

made for and used by ali'i who would lash it to a eanoe to hold spears while sailing. With Hui Mālama I Nā Kūpuna o Hawai'i Nei, Trustee Sam Kealoha and I immediately joined in writing a ietter objecting to the proposed sale and claiming this object under the provisions of the federal Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act

(MAOPKA). Last month a delegation consisting of myself, Hui Mālama's Eddie Halealoha Ayau, and OHA staff Linda Delaney and Shane Pale met with Rhode Island officials in New York to visit the ki'i and to formally consult regarding its return to the Hawaiian people. After this meeting, we have the assurance that the ki'i will not be sold until and unless the national NAGPRA Review Committee denies the Hawaiian elaim for repatriation. lf the elaim is upheld, Providence will abide by this finding and return the ki'i. The theft and dispossession of Hawaiian patrimony began with contact and continues - many of our national treasures sit in museums 6,000 miles from the islands. These objects are an inseparable part of the thefts and harms experienced, and an inseparable part of the needed repair and healing. The beauty and enduring spiritual life of nā mea la'a - our sacred objects - is a deep affirma-

tion and confirmation of our continuing existence as Hawaiians. The strength of Hawaiian claims and repatriation of many, if not all of these items as sacred and patrimonial objects under NAGPRA are appropriate. These objects ean and will be repatriated. But where will they be taken? How will they be cared for? Who will care for them, and in what manner? Most frequently noted is the

PU'UHONUA or WAHI PANA - sacred places where it is both "safe and expected" that traditional values and practices will guide use and management. Often, this function is associated with deep feelings of modern reverence for sacred places of refuge (pu'uhonua) and traditional historic places or cultural sites (wahi pana). This func-

tion aspires to retneve not only the arts and skills but the active spirituality of the Hawaiian culture. Also increasingly discussed is a plaee to hold Hawaiian sacred objects - NĀ WAIHONA MEA LA'A. The cultural imperative to return Hawaiian national treasures under NAGPRA raises the fundamental issue of identifying an appropriate plaee. Such a plaee is not a museum. It's a plaee of performance and practice, of ritual and belief. Polhiea! sovereignty and the settlement of land claims will be hollow without an accompanying foundation of assured cultural identity. The Hawaiian body poliīie requires a soul. Items central to our identity as a nation and a people - the traditional symbols of spirit, rule and function - have also been stolen and must be returned. Our nation will require a government, land, and a renewed soul.