Talk:Tui Nayau

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Muddling of Historical Information I think the latest additions begining with the paragraph "the Line of the Tui Nayau......" should be compleletely removed because it is written from misintepretation and assumptions from information gathered by original sources in individual Tui Nayau profiles. Whoever did this, please dont take offense but you cause the article to lack substance and fact for instance here are other records of cannibalism in Lau, but because whoever wrote this read only the two incidences in the articles pertaining to previous Tui Nayau's assumed there was only two incidences. Please check with the original person who posted these artciles for verification or else you risk making a mockery of the artcile and integrity of contents found on wikipedia.....Vinaka a Concerned Lauan

People would like to see the whole history of about the title of the Tui Nayau, like the History of others that are on the this site, like the King of Tonga for example. So sad to see that info that is aveilable on this page about the Tui Nayau is very limited, and I don't why people afraid of the truth to be told. The Tui Nayau is not just about Rt Mara, and Rt Finanu, it is about the whole clan of the Vuanirewa. Please don't be mistaken the history of the Tui Nayau if it not written we owe it to the next generations. (John W edit)

I wrote part of the article and included everything I knew. I am not Fijian, let alone Lauan. Laulad and a couple of others have expanded what I wrote considerably. One limitation is the Wikipedia policy of verifiability : aural traditions are not always easily verifiable. David Cannon 10:18, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

David some of the names on your chart are not suppose to be under the list of the title holder of the Tui Nayau. Even Rt Mara the late Tui Nayau would agree to that. In one of his book he indicated that he was not of the line of the title holder, His great grand father was the one who accomodated the missionaries when they first arrived in Fiji, in the village of Tubou in the Island of Lakeba. At that time Rk Taliai Tupou was the Tui Nayau. Rt Mara said in his book that he was the fulfilment of the prophecy that was given to his great grand because they opened their house to them to accomodate the message that God wants to give to the people of the land. The prophecy was that a child is going to come forth from that family and he is going to be the leader of Fiji one day. I guess most most of the info you need regarding this topic are not aveilable on books, but you need to talk to the right people who has them. I know because I am one of them (By John W)

Hi Id just like to point out that I was the one who filled in the profiles for the earlier Tui Nayau's Roko Malani and Taliai Tupou. I have foucsed on the earlier Tui Nayau's as I find wrting about them a tougher challenge than Ratu Mara of which so much has already been written. Aside from family recollections I have tried to remain objective in the content, all that have been put into the profiles are corroborated from early documentations, such as Hocart who lived on Lakeba at the turn of the century and recorded a lot of the lineages and history from the then Tui Nayau Ratu Mara's granfather, Ratu Finau. There are also documents which support the observations and records collected by Hocart, such as the journal entries for the early missionaries Cargill and Cross.

I am also from Tubou and also a descendant of Taliai Tupou and I understand there are differing versions to our history, which is why I have only put things that have be verified from mulitple records from the archives and what can be corroborated again from family members, without an agenda.

Ok, if you truly a decendant of Taliai Tupou, then you will know that he is the second son of Roko Rasolo (1st installed Tui Nayau), for some reasons the title was not handed over to his older Brother Malani.

During the arrival of the Missionaries in 1835 Taliai was the Tui Nayau. After the reign of Taliai Tupou, his son Eroni became the Tui Nayau. Eroni Loganimoce didn't have any son to carry on the title, but he did have a younger brother Tevita Tuimereke.

How the title been tranfered to the line of Malani is something that needs to be cleared. It is a big question that has been avoided for such a long time.

(John W)

Hi again, I assume its Jone Wesele, if you look at the table its indicates Rasolo as the first Tui Nayau and is indicated by the number 3.(1). I was also initially confused about the placing of Malani and whether he did hold the title, as our family history suggests he didn’t. But like I said when writing the articles we have to be objective as we are writing about events that happened 180 years ago. Now according to early missionary accounts, the three Tahitian London missionaries arrived on Lakeba in 1830 and were received by the “king” of the island, who is indicated as Malani. Cargill and Cross arrived later on and as Cargill indicated in his journal the “previous Tui Nayau Malani had died in 1833. William Cary the survivor of the Oeno which was wrecked in 1825 in the Lau islands also mentions befriending Roko Malani and staying with him for a period in Bau, this again can be corroborated that William Cary knew Roko Malani intimately as Roko Malani himself named his son Viliame (William) Vuetasau in honour of his American friend. All this suggests that Roko Malani was indeed Tui Nayau. Another interesting fact is that Cargill did not mix up the two brothers, Roko Malani and Taliai Tupou, as his description of them- Malani was described as “a good looking and muscular man” and Taliai, well lets just say I was insulted by the description as he is my ancestor “ the king was rather fat surrounded by his wives and court”. So I think the descriptions plus accounts and dates in the journals would support what Ive written.

Also note from family history, there were three not two brothers, you missed out Soroaqali, it was he who handed the title to Malani, as his mother was from Lakeba, whereas his brothers mothers were from Totoya, Laufitu and Radravu. He is according to our oral history supposed to have said- translated “ You be the high chief for I am already a chief here, and I will make the people do as you ask”. All this does support Malani taking the title as he was the eldest, but Im quite sure he didn’t have it for long cause by 1833 Taliai Tupou is indicated to have been Tui Nayau.

Again with the passing of Taliai Tupou in 1875, the longest lived Tui Nayau and recorded chief in Fiji, the title did not pass directly to Eroni Loganimoce, as Tevita Uluilakeba son of Malani was earmarked for this and recorded to have been nominated by Taliai himself and Ma’afu who was now a major player in Laun politics. However Tevita Uluilakeba died suddenly one year (1876) after Talai Tupou and was succeed to the title instead by Eroni Loganimoce. We cannot argue about dates and facts for Taliai Tupou’s reign from 1860 onwards as the records for this period is well documented in the archives.

Also note I am honestly being very careful with what Im putting onto the profiles as I understand it can be quite sensitive which is why Im cross checking to ensure objectivity. Anything Im not sure of, even if it is part of family history, I have not put on. For example we all know Eroni Loganimoce had no sons from family history and this is again backed up from the family tree recorded by Hocart Book with the help of elders in Tubou and Ratu Finau, Ratu Mara’s grandfather, as his branch ends with him and the next surviving branch as you correctly mention being Tevita Tuimereke. But there are people who are now claiming to be Eroni Loganimoce’s direct descendants…….now this is information with an agenda which I do not want to go into.

Tevita Tuimereke was indeed supposed to succeed Eroni Loganimoce in 1898, however he passed over for Ratu Finau, Ratu Mara’s grandfather, this again if you read between the lines for records for the period was for political reasons and Bau’s growing influence on Lakeba. Think this is well covered by A. Reid’s book, The Fruit of the Rewa, who interviewed Ratu Sukuna as part of his research.

But again like I said I am not writing up the information on Lau to score points but because I am proud of our colourful and vibrant Lauan history and am trying to get as much information in writing because as time passes the stories passed on by word of mouth begin to change which is likely to confuse coming generations even more.

But thanks for the comments, its very constructive criticism which will help improve the profiles. Please fell free to comment on the other sections, if you think Ive missed out something or made an error.

Tahitian missionaries who arrived in Fiji (1830) prior to David and Willian, didn't reached the Island of Lakemba, they only end up in Oneata, and your comment is something the Oneata people will dispute it strongly. Oneata people always will defend the truth, about their Island being the first Island to recieved the Gospel in Fiji, and that is the TRUTH that can never be disputed. The gospel from the Tahitian missionaries didn't go beyond Oneata. Note the difference, David and William go direct to the Island of Lakemba because that is where the chief of the province lives, and it was easy for the Tui Nayau to allow them to do their presentation because it comes with the recomendation of King George I (1835). According to the Christianity in the Pacific edited by Rt A Suguta and Lavenia Ah Choy, the Missionaries arrival in Fiji was made possible due to the long trade relation the Lauan and Tongan has.

I dont think anyone would contest the Tahitian missionaries Hatai and Faruea (or Atai and Arue as the Oneatans named them) reached Oneata as the the two of them incuding a third companion are buried on the island (5 in total arrived on Lakeba), the last dying according to records in 1846, waiting to be taken back to Tahiti. However, you are incorrect in stating they did not reach Lakeba, they did so in 1830, but were were rebuffed by the then Tui Nayau, indicated as Malani, as they failed to learn the local language and because Malani himself was a strong believer in the old religion, he according to later missionary accounts died a heathen. Malani then sent them on to Oneata where they met their eventual demise. This is repeatedly indicated from various sources, Fiji and the Fijians- Kim Gravelle, The View from Vatuwaqa- A. C Reid and many others. Just to show you that this is being repeatedly mentioned as a fact in most articles on the history of Christianity of Fiji today, check the websites below on Fiji- www.fijibure.com/history2.htm and www.bulafiji-au.com/mission.htm, these are just two examples and there are countless more and also journals that cite this. Im not here to argue with the people of Oneata, but if they feel all existing historical accounts are wrong, then it is up to them to correct it. But as far as research for encylopedias such as wikipedia goes if you dont have records to back things up, then its subjective and will cause a never ending debate. I'll also try and get a copy of Suguta and Ah Choys copy from the USP Pacific Collection, I find it interesting that the two authors are contradicting all other earlier authors. Thanks for this, should be fun researching this more.

It is clear that history acknowledge the fact that the first Missionaries arrived in Fiji in 1830 from Tahiti. But they never went to Lakemba, and that was the main reason their mission wasn't successful, because the failed to target the proper channel. However David and William's mission became successful, was because the channel they followed was proper, From King George I to the Tui Nayau (Rk Taliai Tupou) and from the Tui Nayau to Cakobau (The Tui Viti) New Ideas are only presented to the King and no one else, for the Tui Nayau to recieve something that was first presented to Oneata, it was something that was unecceptable,and the People of Oneata they know that.

Im not convinced that the Tahitian missionaries did not land in Lakeba first for the following reasons- the various records supporting their landing on Lakeba, written by misionaries themselves (William Cross in his diary for the year 1839, states he found the two Tahitian teachers still at work on Oneata, and "in good repute". During their six years on Oneata they had gathered about twenty converts to their teaching, but had made no progress with the language)- the key points here are 1839 and the 6 years on Oneata. Assuming they arrived in Lau in 1830, what happened to the missing 3 years, this indicates where else could they have been from 1830 to 1833, Lakeba!. And more importantly they were sent by the King of Tonga (Tahafahau or King George Tupou I) they didint come to Lau on their own volition, the London Missionary Society missionaries had been in Tonga since 1747, 83 years before arriving in Lau. Now obviously it would seem very odd for Tahafahau to send the Tahitian missionaries direct to Oneata when his cousin, Malani (via the Tui Kanokupolu line) resided in Lakeba. Im sure the missionaries would have been familiar before leaving Tonga on which was the major island in Lau and who was the high chief, migration between the two island groups were very frequent, moreover they went with royal assent from tongatapu and would have been instructed to go to Lakeba, why would they go to Oneata first otherwise.

If youre trying to also imply distance probably, closeness to Tonga, again note Ono i Lau is closer to Tongatapu, why make the effort to go all the way north, unless they knew where they were supposed to go....again Lakeba. Hey I think were going out of topic here.....this is the Tui Nayau Page not on the missionaries, if youre comfortable stating they landed on Oneata first, then start a page and see what other Fijians on the wikipedia think......should be a good debate.

Contents 1 Query on the Roko Sau Title 2 Query answered 3 New Comment 4 In Response

[edit] Query on the Roko Sau Title

is the Roko Sau and Tui Lau one in the same title?? I am unaware of the Title Roko Sau and as far as I am aware there was no Paramount Chieftan of Lau until the introduction of the Tongan Title Tui Lau prior to that it was several Paramount Chieftans of areas which made up Lau, anyway it's just a query on the topic?

Malo Maikeli

MB 01:42, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Query answered

please see detailed explaination on Laulad user talk page

User:Laulad

Laulad great article, keep up the good work

Vinaka Maikeli

MB 21:09, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Comment

A big confusion I've ever seen, about the Title of Tui Nayau and the Roko Sau. I am a descendant of Matawalu, as far as I know he was not a Tui Nayau, not even installed on any position such as a Roko sau. The very reason he was killed, was because he was trying to do his Sau at Dakuilakeba, and it was reported to his brother (the Tui Nayau Rasolo) and the Tui Nayau sent a message for Matawalu to be brought over to Tubou, the people of Dakuilakeba has to take Matawalu by force because they cannot afford to serve to masters. People of dakuilakeba who brought Matawalu over, killed Matawalu before they reached Tubou, later on they named that place BALEYAGA. Matawalu made vow to Rasolo before they left Nayau, that vow was not to lead but to serve the Yaqona for the Tui Nayau. Mr Editor if want to comment on the Title Tui Nayau don't mix it up with the Roko Sau, the Roko Sau can be another title.

Malani was never installed, because Rasolo his fater told him that he wont have the title because he doen't have much respect of father, instead Roko Taliai was chosen.

1ST 3 TITLE HOLDER (TUI NAYAU) First installed - Roko Rasolo Second Installed - Roko Taliai Third Installed - Eroni Loganimoce

I wish some one could put all the installed Tui Nayau (not the Roko Sau please)right - to Rt Mara on this article.

First just to clarify it wasnt the editor who made the changes, it was actually me User:Lauladwho actualy added a lot more than was initailly there in the first place. First Id like to make it clear I will not entertain comments if it is not backed up by recorded or actual referenced material on the history on Lakeba, furthermore I am being very objective in the sense that I have not included family history on the Vuanirewa if I feel it bears some agenda by other members of the Vuanirewa. I am a descendant of Taliai Tupou, and if I was really biased this whole article would be saturated with the noble household Vatuwaqa history and less attention paid to the Matailakeba and even less to the other clans. As you can read from the article this is not the case and the information added I feel is very balanced in respect to all noble households.

From your comments it is either you didint read the article or dont understand English as you can clearly see in both the written and tabulated material, Matawalu in clearly stated as not being Tui Nayau but simply Roko Sau. As far as recorded history of the Vuanirewa goes Matawalu was killed by Malani. For example, Hocart mentions this in his recordings whilst living in Lakeba and again is mentioned in Ratu Sukuna's writings "the three legged stool" where in describing the Vuanirewa, mentions Malani seizing the chieftainship". It appears you have mixed the information for Dranivia and Matawalu. Also I find it ridiculous for Rasolo to want his brother killed considering Matawalu is recorded to have helped Rasolo win Lakeba back from Codro. Also you write Matawalu was killed then made a vow, how is this physically possible!!!!

Also I find it interesting that you say Roko Malani was not installed Tui Nayau, considering all early missonary writings consider him as such and why would Roko Taliai Tupou designate Roko Malani's son Vuetasau his heir if he didint defer to the older branch. If Vuetasau had not drowned it is likely he would have succeeded to the title Tui Nayau, on Roko Taliai Tupou's death. Vuetasau son Ratu Tevita Uluilakeba II also would have succeeded to the Tui Nayau title had he not died prematurely in 1876. It was only because of this that Roko Eroni Loganimoce succeeded. It is at Eroni Loganimoce's death that conflict over the two houses began- most records agree that Ratu Salesi from Vatuwaqa should have succeeded instead of Ratu Alifereti Finau- this dispute is again mentioned in Hocart and Ratu Sukuna's own writing. As far as Im concerned the line has continued directly through Matailakeba since, which again is reflected in the article, anything to do with who should inherit or not is just a matter of opinion which Im not going to bother putting on the article.

But thank you for you thoughts, I will cross check as I have always done, if I think youre right Ill amend article if not it stays the same. Vinaka

[edit] In Response

the above is very interesting information I would encourage you to contact the Author of this article who is under User:Laulad click here and share your thoughts with him, its important information and I am sure he would appreciate the help in compiling his articles, oh and please sign your comments, I checked your talk page but you don't have a talk section? so I left my comments here, by the way have you got any information on the Rasau of Lomaloma? I would appreciate your imput.

Malo Maikeli

MB 09:50, 20 February 2007 (UTC)