Talk:Kapaʻakea

Kapaakea's parents

There was a section about Kamanawa being hanged for murdering his wife. I removed it since no source was cited. Although it may have been from a personal family's history, this I can understand. And I do have notation in my database dated Nov. 28, 2007 from a website that mentioned Kamanawa was hanged for poisoning his wife (which wasn't mentioned how she was "murdered") I decided to just omit it entirely since mentioning it under Kapaakea seems more scandalous than informative showing the possibility of how he became popular and his family's name tarnished after this murder. And yet there is mentioned of his royal duties. This man did a lot while serving in the House of Nobles and listing his family's bad past doesn't make him who he is or isn't, so something like that I can understand being listed under Kamanawa himself or his wife Kamokuiki. Then again, these websites on genealogies doesn't list their source. As a genealogist for now 22 years, I say the sources still must be listed. Just as it is here on Wikipedia. Mamoahina (talk) 15:19, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

No it's in written sources. It's not personal family history. The newspaper of the time wrote a lot about it. In my opinion it makes sense because it's follows with a sentence on how he recieved few lands in the Great Mahele, explaining why he recieved so few lands being a chief. He gain most of his position because of his marriage to his wife who was of higher rank than him. I'm really busy right now. I'll come back, revert it, and site soon.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 19:11, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Do you have a link to the newspaper articles because I looked this morning but nothing went prior to 1838 that I saw online. Although that occurance would happen after and the land grants finalized by '49. Or do you have the names of the papers and dates that they printed those stories? I'd like to read them. Also, I think it would be best then to list the actual source of the paper that mentioned based on the scandal (which you claim) that led him to receive X amount of lands. If he did receive less amount of land based on what his father did, then the article needs to indicate that, not state that his image & rep was tarnished b/c of a scandal and then lead right into the land grants w/o explaining, according to the paper at that time, that is probably why he rec'd that less. Cite the source first, then edit it to reflect exactly what you stated, NOT revert it back to its original verbage didn't say anything except a tarnished image to the family.

Kapaakea was nominated as a member of the house of Noble for a reason. Whether you think his image or his family's image was tarnished because of what happened based on what a reporter wrote in the newspaper, and we know how the media reflects the current thought at the time, doesn't necessarily mean their facts are truth, I think it would be best that you list some type of explanation about how the paper hinted that due to his parents' situation that may have been the reason why he was seen differently and therefore awarded differently, based on what you claim this article mentioned. But I'm willing to go with that if that's what it says regardless if it's not entirely true. But there should be a section as to how Kapaakea was a high ranking chief in his own right, his father was one of the royal twins. He was chosen as a member of the House of Nobles and not because of his wife, who was also a daughter and great-granddaughter of chiefs instrumental in Kamehameha's unification.

Then there's that questionable part of Keohokalole actually being higher ranking than Kamanawa's son. I can't say that is true or not true but what I can say for a fact is that we all know that the mother's rank outranks the father's but we're talking about descendants of chiefs who were instrumental in Kamehameha's unification which is why under Kaukeaouli these nobles' children were selected to attend the Royal School. So not sure, especially in these times, rank would still be pertinent or have some type of clout. Because if Keohokalole was a high ranking chiefess, that would mean her high rank came from her mom who had Kauai ties. If it were the father, then that would make our 'ohana also high ranking since my great-great-grandfather D. H. Nahinu's grandfather was Paoakalani, the younger brother to 'Aikanaka, Keohokalole's father. It would be hard to cite the exact rank since you really won't find anything about that post-1820 other than "highER rank." We've heard of Kapiolani being higher rank than Kalakaua but that obviously doesn't seem to capture any interest b/c there's no scandal involved I guess? But again as I somewhat mentioned earlier, b/c of Kalakaua's ancestors he was able to attend the Royal School which led him to this point to rule. Not his wife who was higher ranking than he was, the same for Keopuolani. Mamoahina (talk) 05:08, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't get you. It's common sense on part of a historian to read and understand history and interpret it as such. History said his father was executed for murdering his wife so he could escape the clause of adultery. 1830s and 1840s in Hawaii was extrememly Christian; Kamehameha III and Kaahumanu II were persecuting Catholics and missionaries structured the laws based on the Christian ten commandments. If your family killed or committed adultery at that time, wouldn't it's reputation be tarnished?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 21:36, 24 June 2011 (UTC)