Dr. Charles F. Urbanowicz / Professor of Anthropology
California State University, Chico / Chico, California 95929-0400
530-898-6220 [Office]; 530-898-6192 [Dept.]; FAX: 530-898-6143
e-mail: / home page:  

[This Page is printed from:]

15 August 2003 [1]

© [All Rights Reserved.] This paper was originally presented on November 21, 1971, at the 70th Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological Association, New York, New York and was placed on the WWW on August 15, 2003 as an "example" of ideas and writing of 1971. The text below is essentially unchanged from the original 1971 paper (with additions being indicated in [ ]'s below). In placing this paper on the WWW some 32 years after it was written I attempt to demonstrate to my students that life is, in fact, cumulative and ideas develop out of previous ideas; I also follow the 1963 words of Sir Karl Popper [1902-1994]: "we can learn from our mistakes [stress added]" (Conjectures And Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge, 1963, page vii).Several of my earlier papers have already been placed on the WWW for student use, such as Urbanowicz 1965, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970a , 1970b, 1972, 1973, 1976a, 1976b, 1977, 1980, and 1983 (all referenced below); in placing them on the WWW, I was often reminded of the words of stanza 51 from the 1859 (first) edition translation of The Rubáiyát of Omar Khayyám of Naishápúr by Edward Fitzgerald (1809-1883)

"The Moving Finger writes; and having Writ,
Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it."

Please note the following: "The first Edition of the translation of Omar Khayyám, which appeared in 1859, differs so much from those which followed, that it has thought better to print it in full, instead of attempting to record the differences." W. Aldis Wright, n.d. [1932?], The Rubáiyát of Omar Khayyám And the Salámán And Absál of Jámí Rendered Into English Verse by Edward Fitzgerald (NY: A.L. Burt Company), page 119.

This 1971 paper dealt with my Ph.D. fieldwork concerning the Polynesian Kingdom of Tonga and several publications resulted from that 1970-1971 fieldwork, also referenced below. Incidentally, although for years I have requested that my students include an EXECUTIVE SUMMARY/ABSTRACT as well as SECTION HEADINGS and specific CONCLUSIONS in their papers, it is obvious that I did not do that in 1971 (but they have been added below in appropriate [ ]'s)!

Historical footnote: Born in Jersey City, New Jersey in 1942, I graduated high school in 1960 and after attending New York University in 1960-1961, I enlisted in the United States Air Force (1961-1965), was Honorably Discharged, and eventually received the B.A. in Sociology/Anthropology in 1967 from Western Washington State College (now Western Washington University). I began Graduate Work in Anthropology at the University of Oregon in September 1967 and received the M.A. in Anthropology in 1969. In July 1970 I went (with my wife) to do fieldwork in the Polynesian Kingdom of Tonga and was awarded the Ph.D. in 1972. For a complete résumé, please see I taught in the Department of Anthropology at the University of Minnesota for 1972-1973 and joined the faculty of California State University, Chico, in August 1973 and have been happily here ever since! This November 1971 paper was written in my fourth year of graduate work when I was twenty-nine years of age and had just returned from fieldwork. The year 1971 was the last time I was in Tonga.

[PRE-1875 AND POST 1875]
[APPENDIX III: OTHER SPECIFIC URBANOWICZ HISTORICAL WEB PAGES (in reverse chronological order]: 1965 -> 1983]



The extremely broad title of this paper is certainly not reflected in the body of the text, wherein only two specific but significant aspects of Tongan culture are examined: the concepts of religion and rank in the 19th and 20th centuries as analyzed by 20th century research. Religion and rank provide us with unique examples of types of change that have occurred in Tonga. Concepts of Western European religion have been successfully substituted for the indigenous religious system and changes have occurred in the internal indigenous ranking system.



Tonga is the only Polynesian Kingdom to successfully survive into the 20th century and it is currently a Constitutional Monarchy under His Majesty King Taufa'ahau Tupou IV [born 1918 ->]. The "survival" and establishment of the Constitutional monarchial form of government was due to a skillful and somewhat bloodthirsty unification of the archipelago in 1852 by King George Tupou I (a Gr. Gr. Gr. Grandfather of his current majesty). The unification of the Kingdom after the final war of 1852 and the subsequent reorganization and codification of the laws of the Kingdom along Western European concepts (notably the influence of individuals from Great Britain, although some Americans were involved) brought about changes which have had ramifications in Tonga to this day. These changes have come about even though Tonga still maintains much of the traditional way of life. There has been change with continuity, which Gifford (1929) has termed "Euroamerican acculturation," with a select blending of various aspects of Euroamerican culture. Yet with this change there is still something which is essentially Tonga as Oliver pointed out: "Tongans learned long ago that the easiest way to remain Tongan is to appear Western" (1961: 179). This appearance comes across clearly in the form of government which Tongans eventually adopted. Scarr has shown that Tongans were advised by Euroamericans after the island Kingdom was unified in the 19th century that if Tonga wanted to avoid being "taken over" by larger foreign powers, Tonga would have to take on the trappings of Westernization, replete with a "western facade of a written constitution and codified laws" (Scarr, 1968: 86). Thus the celebrated Constitution of 1875 was the culmination of all the written island law codes, since the first Vava'u code of 1839. The Constitution was the result of the influence of many individuals, Tongans and Euroamericans alike, and can serve as a landmark for much of our discussion on Tonga.



The date of 1875 is extremely important in analyzing Tonga over time, for in many respects (notably inheritance of titles and the concept of 'eiki) Tonga before the Constitution was not the same as Tonga after the Constitution. Tonga has changed over the years but all too often published research accounts fail to take this important aspect of Tonga into consideration: change over time!



My dissertation research, which this paper is a brief result of, was concerned with an ethnographic reconstruction of Tonga at the time of European contact. This is from a first documented contact date of 1616 to the period which I term "sustained European contact" which is roughly 1826 and thereafter. The bulk of the research deals with a detailed ethnographic description of the archipelago in the late 18th century and early 19th century combined with fieldwork in Tonga in the 20th century, and an analysis of the "hows" and the "whys" of Tongan sociocultural change. Since the problem was essentially an anthropological cum ethnohistorical one, the method of research called for library fieldwork combined with fieldwork in the archipelago. In my original funding proposal (1969: 5) I stated that "ethnohistorical reconstruction is essentially the placing of time perspective into the study of culture" (and see Maude, 1971: 21, one of the individuals I initially discussed the problem with in 1969). This was what was essentially done, blending "historical techniques with anthropological method and theory to deal with a particular type of problem" (Urbanowicz, 1970: 4). The library fieldwork involved analyzing manuscript material of the 19th century. Though much of the manuscript analyzed was recorded by various missionaries in the islands, a great deal of it is utilizable by the ethnographer. Though the missionaries in Tonga may have been biased in their reports (consisting of journals, letters, and assorted unpublished materials), their biases were consistent and hence one can compensate for the bias in the data. It is much better to have a consistently biased report than an inconsistently biased report, or, worse yet, no report at all! The overall manuscript material provided new data on indigenous religious beliefs and practices, social organization, and the sociopolitical systems of the island group. When taken in consideration with 20th century fieldwork in the archipelago, the manuscript data provides a new view of pre-contacted and early contacted Tonga and helps us in understanding changing Tonga.



As stated above, the Tonga of post-1875 was not the same as the Tonga of pre-1875 since important changes had taken place in the internal sociocultural system, most notable being the Constitution of 1875. Even 1850, the date given in the Ethnographic Atlas for cross-cultural research (of a certain type) can be misleading, for by 1850 two major wars had already been fought in the archipelago (1837 and 1840), the Tongan language reduced to a script (c. 1830), and a codified system of laws had already been in effect for parts of the archipelago (Vava'u and Ha'apai). Certainly Goldman's most recent work (1970: xxviii) which suggests 1800 as the "terminal date" for aboriginal Polynesian society merits closer consideration than 1850 for Tonga.

Utilizing 1800 as a terminal date for Tonga, one has a dynamically operating and changing Polynesian society, with an elaborate system of rank (based on kin ties) and an extremely important indigenous religious system, complete with a pantheon of high gods. The pantheon of high gods is one aspect of Tongan culture documented by the manuscript material which has often been overlooked in research done whilst Tonga was a "Western religion-oriented" island group. Tonga was, and still is, an extremely religious-oriented and rank conscious kinship-oriented archipelago, but changes within various internal systems developed over time.

The archipelago of Tonga, which extends approximately 200 miles north-south for the three main island groups of Tongatapu, Ha'apai and Vava'u, had traditionally been under the leadership of the sacred leader, the Tu'i Tonga, and the near relatives of the Tu'i Tonga. In approximately the 15th century a division was made between the sacred and secular duties of leadership and the secular aspects of running the archipelago were delegated to a brother of the Tu'i Tonga and the line of the Tu'i Ha'a Takalaua was begun. In approximately the 17th century the Tu'i Ha'a Takalaua delegated some of his secular duties to one of his sons and thus the line of the Tu'i Kanokupolu was created for the son. (The Tu'i Kanokupolu derived from Tu'i of Upolu of Upolu of the Samoan Islands, indicating the preponderance of Samoan people and Samoan kin ties in the territory on Tongatapu of the first Tu'i Kanokupolu.) The sacred and secular aspects of running the islands were still intermingled, with the Tu'i Ha'a Takalaua and the Tu'i Kanokupolu paying homage to the Tu'i Tonga whilst also taking care of the secular aspects of keeping the island group under the one religious head. The island of Tonga was known as Tongatapu, or sacred-profane Tonga because this was the residency of the Tu'i Tonga.

"The Tuitonga was viewed as the representative of the god Hikuleo, a kind of connecting link therefore between the people, and the god and his place was at Olotele [Tongatapu]...he was not viewed as a prince, but more as the friend of the god, and was a kind of demigod to the others [being the chiefs and people of the archipelago] who paid him divine honors." (J. Thomas, Ms., p. 252)

Tribute was paid to the Tu'i Tonga twice a year at the two Inasi, or first fruit ceremonies. The tribute, in the form of shells, feathers, produce and the like, was brought from the entire archipelago to Tongatapu. The distant island of Uvea, or Wallis Island, also brought tribute to Tongatapu. The chiefs and the people were all involved in the religious aspects of the archipelago and it was truly a religious sociopolitical system. Even some of the missionaries were astute enough to understand (after several years in the field) how the religion cum sociopolitical systems operated. One missionary wrote on the chiefs of Tonga in the early 19th century and the traditional patterns before that, that "Hence their sacred and secular matters appeared to be very much interwoven and their duties to their gods were kept up...." (J. Thomas, Ms., p. 75).

When the missionaries finally arrived to stay in 1826 (after fruitless attempts in 1797 and 1822) the indigenous religious beliefs were very strong, and the Tu'i Kanokupolu was still supposed to be the enforcer of the secular aspects of the archipelago. But one Tu'i Kanokupolu was converted to Christianity (in 1830) and after several major chiefs also followed suit the religious system began to falter. Since the Tu'i Kanokupolu was supposed to enforce the rules pertaining to secular-sacred overlap, there was indeed some opposition when the Tu'i Kanokupolu Aleamotu'a was converted to Christianity, and hence a missionary wrote:

"A report is in circulation that the chiefs who are opposed to Christianity are determined to depose our Chief Tubou and to choose one from among themselves in his place. It is probable that should this take place, a war would be the immediate consequence." (W. Cross, Ms., July 1, 1830)

The Tu'i Kanokupolu was selected by a general consensus of the major chiefs and traditionally only ruled with their approval.The war which they feared in 1830 did not occur until a later date and the Western Bible and Western material goods continued to make their inroads into the Tongan archipelago, even though many Tongans remained steadfastly opposed to the missionary endeavors. Tongans often told the early European missionaries that "your religion is very good for you, and ours is very good for us" (W. Lawry, Ms., December 21, 1822). The religious and political wars of 1837, 1840, and 1852 eventually decimated the opposition to Christianity. Writing of the 1840 war, one missionary wrote that the non-Christian Tongans, or "heathens" as they were called by the missionaries, "seem determined to die in their foolishness. I am told that they have made an oath to do so, before they will yield to the Xtns" (P. Turner, Ms., July 19, 1840).

Eventually the indigenous religious system, which was so inextricably interwoven with the sociopolitical system, collapsed and Tonga became a nominally Christian nation under a nominal Christian chief: Taufa'ahau, or King George Tupou I (as he was also called). A recent assessment by Latukefu (1970: 61) of King George's rise to power is well worth considering:

"It appears, however, that Taufa'ahau's initial acceptance of Christianity was only a part of his general desire to adopt the ways of the white man, his wealth, superior knowledge and weapons of war, and also [incidentally] his religion, to achieve his ambitions."

When King George Tupou I successfully unified the Tongan body politic with the Western European religious ideas, he stripped some of the defeated chiefs from their positions of authority and some of the defeated chiefs in turn altered their religious alliance from their own religious beliefs to the Wesleyan faith (Amos, Ms., August 27, 1852).

The religious changes wrought by the wars of the 19th century were so pervasive and encompassing that the results still linger to this day in the Kingdom and religion permeates the very atmosphere of Tongan life. Religious strictures were written into the various law codes, commencing in 1839, and culminating in the Constitution of 1875 when it was written into the law that the Sabbath shall be kept holy. Sunday in Tonga today is a very, very quiet phenomenon indeed, and no work, no games, and almost all non-church activities are forbidden. The Tongan census officer of 1956 summed up extremely well the influence of religion:

"The question of religion occupies so prominent a place in the life of the Tongans that it deserves a book on its own. It influences to a very considerable extent their attitudes and beliefs, regulates their behaviour and sets down a code of ethics that governs and permeates almost every aspect of their daily life." (Tupouniua, 1958: 29

With no alteration this statement could also hold true for the indigenous religious system, which was systematically removed while an induced Western European religious system was substituted in its place.

Yet today in Tonga one still finds some changes in religious views, together with strong religious beliefs. Recently an oil consortium began exploratory drilling on Tongatapu and, although the first well had to be abandoned for lack of oil indication (The Tonga Chronicle, November 4, 1971: page 1), Parliamentary permission had been obtained by the oil drillers to keep their equipment operating 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Thus the Sunday law was slightly relaxed. On the other hand, a recent poll made by the weekly Tongan Chronicle newspaper indicates that while some Tongans would like to see some relaxation of the Sunday laws others do not:

"1. Do you think the law can be relaxed and the Sabbath Day still remain holy? Yes - 123; No - 74; Don't Know - 2.
2. Should Sunday observance be left to each individual's conscience? Yes - 98; No - 99; Don't know - 2."
(The Tonga Chronicle, November 4, 1971, page 1)

It would appear that religion in Tonga is there to stay.


[PRE-1875 AND POST 1875]

Along with religious changes as a result of the Constitution of 1875 there have also been changes in the internal system of ranking and titles. Prior to the celebrated Constitution of 1875 the archipelago of Tonga had a loosely structured, feudal-like system, with tribute paid to the chiefs by their own people because of kin ties. With the Constitution of 1875 King George Tupou I established a hereditary class of nobles, or nopele, and assigned various tracts of land to them for their own personal use. Most of the land assignments were made on the basis of a chief's hereditary land rights, but some chiefs did in fact lose their land. Most notable of these were the descendants of the last Tu'i Tonga (who died in 1865). All of the land in Tonga is now Crown Land, with the land apportioned out to the nobles and then being re-divided among the people of the nobles or to people on Crown Land. Non-Tongans may not purchase land and can only lease it from Tongans and King George Tupou I preserved the territorial integrity of Tonga to this day.

Prior to 1875 succession to land and titles was patrilineal, but it was a patriliny that depended on several factors, including age, ability, supporters, and the rank of the individual. If a man died and his direct son was not of age to handle the affairs of chieftanship, the chiefly title couldgo to the deceased's brother. Ability often depended on an individual's skill in battle, and the supporters that a man could raise depended on the strength of his own wive's people and the people of his mother. Tongans had a form of what I term "pragmatic cognatic kinship system." If a title could not go to the eldest son of a deceased man, it could go to the son of the deceased's highest ranking wife. Although titles are passed from father to son, rank is transmitted through women.

Women in Tonga have always held an important position in the sociocultural system. In the early 19th century, and well before that, one of the highest ranked positions was that of the female called the Tamaha, or sacred child. Literally everyone paid due respect and homage to her from all of Tongan society, even the Tu'i Tonga, and her own male heirs were high in rank and status. Even though recent work (Kaeppler, 1971: 183) denigrates the position of the Tamaha in the past, on the basis of treatment accorded one of the Tamaha's male descendants, the Tamaha was in fact a high ranking individual of her day. Tradition has it that her power was only cut short by King George Tupou I before the middle of the 19th century, and then from that point on her descendants lost status. Today women in Tonga hold command of the genealogies and according to the Tongan Constitution they are allowed to inherit the estates and material wealth of an individual (contra Kaeppler, 1971: 178).

With the coming of the Constitution in 1875 the flexible system of inheritance of titles passed out of existence and a more rigid inheritance system initiated. Where before a chief was a chief because of the consensus of his people, now he is a chief, or a titled person by law. With the onset of Western religious opinions, illegitimate children were no longer considered to be in the line of inheritance, neither could adopted children and their descendants be considered in line for a title or estates. At the time of the Constitution of 1875 there were a few title holders who were adopted sons and when the Constitution came into effect the title remained with the titled sons and did not revert to the original family, as would have been the case before the Constitution since a titled person or chief was only so because of consensus. The fact that some adopted sons and their sons have become title holders has resulted in lawsuits to this day.

Prior to the Constitution no man could hold more than one title, since it was often difficult to involve oneself continuously with one's own people. Now, as a result of the Constitution, there are men holding two titles (or someone could conceivably one day hold three) and this has brought about a change in the relationship between a titled person and the people. Most notable of the double titles is Kalaniuvalu-Fotofili. There is currently vacant the double title of Ulukalala-Ata. On one instance Parliamentary approval was obtained by the late Queen Salote Tupou III [1900-1965] to split a double title since her son Tungi (the present King of Tonga) should have had the combined titles of Tungi-Tu'i Pelehake. With Parliamentary approval the title of Tu'i Pelehake went to Tungi's younger brother. (See Kaeppler, 1971, p. 183 and p. 187, for a different interpretation.) Another interesting point is that before the Constitution, Tu'i Pelehake, Tungi, and Kalaniuvalu were not even titles, but merely names of individual 'Eiki, and it was only during the reign of Her Late Majesty Queen Salote Tupou III that they were made into titles at all.

With the creation of the hereditary nopele in 1875, who are included in the generic term hou'eiki, King George also created other problems. The Constitution created the 'Eike nopele, some of whom were only matapules and not even chiefs. Some of the 'Eiki nopele in 1875 were merely 'eiki by title only and not by kin tires with the major lineages. Operationally defined, 'eiki originally and traditionally meant someone who had close kin ties with the major lineages of Tonga or the royal family of Tonga. Individuals who were truly closely related to the major lineages in the past scorned titles entirely and were known to the people as the sinoi'i 'eiki. This is literally translated as the body of the 'eiki, or the 'eikiness itself. This changed with the Constitution and now there are 'eiki's who are not titled and titled persons who are not 'eiki. The former have strong kin ties with the major lineages but no titles and the latter have titles but do not have any major connections with the major lineages.

The changes in the concept of 'eiki before and after the Constitution must be taken into consideration when discussing anything to do with rank, for not only are individual 'eiki's ranked, but titles held by the individuals themselves are ranked. Over the years a title can increase or decrease in its ranked position in relation to other titles, depending on successful or unsuccessful marriages. Arranged marriages have increased the prestige and royal blood of certain lines and thus His Majesty King Taufa'ahau Tupou IV is the culmination of the three major lineages of Tonga and is not only King by title but King by blood as well.



With the coming of the Europeans in the 19th century and the changes in the indigenous sociocultural system, the position of the sino'i 'eiki and the 'eiki in general declined and changed whilst the position of certain titled chiefs and non-'eiki increased. When discussing chiefs, titles, or 'eikiness in Tonga one must be very specific as to what point in time one is referring to, since indigenous concepts did change over time. Not only was the Constitution of 1875 a landmark, but a Wesleyan missionary pointed out that early in the 19th century the system was undergoing a change. One wrote: "It may be noticed that the term 'Eiki applied to the above chiefs,' such as the Tu'i Tonga and Tu'i Kanokopolu, and "their families almost inclusively in by gone days, and was a very choice word, but of late years it has become more common" (J. Thomas, Ms., page 5).

As to why these and other changes came about: my own interpretation is that Tonga was not necessarily "ripe for change" but change came about because of the individuals who were there at the right moment in time. It was only because of a few individuals, Tongans and Europeans, that Tonga changed in the manner it did change. A group of men, missionaries for the most part, brought about a tremendous change in Tonga.* A certain quantity of Western manpower and Western material goods brought about a qualitative change in the archipelago. Just what is the point when a quantitative difference turns into a qualitative distinction I am unable to answer. Tonga was able to successfully adapt the induced Western religious system to its own sociopolitical ideological system and in essence, substituted Western religion for their own indigenous religious beliefs. When it came to changes in the system of ranking and 'eikiness and the introduction of a Western concept of "nobility" for the traditional system of 'eiki, the change was not as complete since the 'eiki system and systems of ranking were too much a part of the indigenous kinship systems. This in Tonga today, using 'eiki in the traditional manner (as "aristocrat"), one has a blend of titled 'eiki, titled non-'eiki, and non-titled 'eiki.



Briefly recapitulating: the Tonga of the 20th century is not quite the same as the Tonga of the 19th century and earlier. This is quite clear when it comes to rank, less clear when dealing with religion. In matters of religion the names have changed along with the mode of worship but a supreme being is still the same. I have tried to demonstrate how at one point in time Tonga had an extremely viable and operating indigenous religious socio-political system and how changes came about which brought about a substitution of western religious elements into the Tongan system. I have also tried to demonstrate that European influences in Tonga changed the system of rank and ranking of titles and individuals (although the system itself was constantly changing), and that if one discusses rank (or anything else for that matter) in Tonga one must take time into consideration, since at different points in time certain terms and concepts had different meanings and interpretations for the Tongans. An "ethnographic present" of 1970-1971 is decidedly not the same as an ethnographic present of 1875, 1850, 1800, or any of the intervening years. I have attempted to point out the fallacy of retroactive reasoning, that is to say, arguing from 20th century data and interpretations to 19th century generalizations. An analysis which states "this is the way it is now and this is the way it was said to be in the past, hence this is the way it was in the past" must be avoided in all reporting. In order to ascertain why Tonga has changed the way it has changed into what it has changed, one must first go back to the earliest eyewitness accounts to see what it was like in the first place! This is what I have done with the manuscript material. Unfortunately one cannot go into the kingdom today and obtain reliable information on certain points of the indigenous sociocultural and religious systems simply because the passage of time has been too great and memories too selective. On some points of Tongan tradition the Tongans themselves are in the dark; points which are available in the anthropological-historical manuscript record.

For the anthropologist Tonga provides a unique example of change over a considerable period of documentable time. This brief paper is one individual's attempt to survey selected aspects of Tongan culture from the 20th century into the 19th century and present the view of Tongans of the 19th century and the 20th century.

# # #


R. Amos, n.d., Manuscript (Mitchell Library [Sydney, Australia]).

W. Cross, n.d., Manuscript (Mitchell Library [Sydney, Australia]).

E.W. Gifford, 1929, Tongan Society (Bernice P. Bishop Museum Bulletin No. 16, Honolulu).

Irving Goldman, 1970, Ancient Polynesian Society (University of Chicago Press).

[A. Kaeppler, 1971, Rank. in Tonga. Ethnology , Vol. X, No. 2: 174-193.]

S. Latukefu, 1970, King George Tupou I of Tonga. J.W. Davidson and Deryck Scarr (Editors), Pacific Island Portraits (Canberra).

W. Lawry, n.d., Manuscript (Mitchell Library [Sydney, Australia]).

H.E. Maude, 1971, Pacific history--past, present and future. The Journal of Pacific History, Vol. 6: 3-24 (Canberra).

Douglas L. Oliver, 1961, The Pacific Islands (Harvard University Press, Cambridge).

Deryck Scarr, 1968, Fragments of Empire (Canberra).

J. Thomas, n.d., Manuscript (Mitchell Library [Sydney, Australia]).

M.U. Tupouniua, 1958, Report on the Results of the 1956 Census, Kingdom of Tonga.

P. Turner, n.d., Manuscript (Mitchell Library [Sydney, Australia]).

C.F. Urbanowicz, 1969, Tongan Culture: An Ethnographic Reconstruction (Original funding proposal).

C.F. Urbanowicz, 1970, Polynesian ethnohistory for the Kingdom of Tonga. Presented at the 23rd Annual Meeting of the Northwesy Anthropological Conference, Oregon State university, Corvallis, Oregon. Abstract in Northwest Anthropological Research Notes, 1970, Vol. 4, No. 1: 61-62.

C.F. Urbanowicz, n.d., Individuals in Tonga and culture change. Paper completed and to appear in a forthcoming collection of essays. [August 2003 Note: This manuscript was never published.]

 # # # 


The world dertainly has changed since this 1971 paper and perhaps some of these web sites might be of interest: [Tongan Visitors Bureau} Welcome to the Kingdom of Tonga] [Tonga} Includes Audio] [Royal Tongan Airlines] [Lonely Planet World guide} Tonga] [Various Tongan Articles and Links] [Pacific Islands Web Directory} Tonga] [Tonga] [Tonga][Pacific Islands Report} Up-to-the-date news] [Australian National University} A massive Pacific Site] [CIA World Factbook} 2002] [New Zealand Government On-Line] [ABC News (Australia)]; finally, check out: [Web Cams around the world, including many in Oceania!]


1994 Review of Islanders of the South: Production, Kinship and Ideology in the Polynesian Kingdom of Tonga (1993) by Paul Van Der Grijp (translated by Peter Mason). Ethnos (Stocklhom), Vol. 59, No. 3-4: 276-278.

1991a Another Look at Tourism With Regards to Tonga. Hosts and Guests, edited by Valene Smith (Tokyo: Keisó Shobo), pp. 147-164 [Japanese Translation of 1989].

1991b Tonga. Encyclopedia of World Cultures, edited by D. Levinson (Boston: Hall-Macmillan), pp. 336-339.

1989 Tourism in Tonga Revisited: Continued Troubled Times? Hosts And Guests: The Anthropology of Tourism, edited by Valene Smith, 2nd Edition (University of Pennsylvania), pp. 105-117.

1988 Review of Early Tonga as the Explorers Saw It: 1616-1810 (1987) by E. N. Ferdon. The American Anthropologist, Vol. 90, No. 4: 1021.

1981a Review of The Nobility and the Chiefly Tradition in the Modern Kingdom of Tonga (1980) by G.E. Marcus. Pacific Studies, Vol. 5, No. 114-116.

1981b Pacific Women: Some Polynesian Examples. Discussion Paper 81-1 in Discussion Paper Series (College of Behavioral and Social Sciences, California State University, Chico).

1979a Change in Rank and Status in the Polynesian Kingdom of Tonga. Political Anthropology: The State of the Art, edited by S. L. Seaton and J. M. Claessen (Mouton: The Hague), pp. 225-242 [identical to 1975a].

1979b Comments on Tongan Commerce, With Reference to Tourism and Traditional Life. Pacific Viewpoint, Vol. 20, No. 2: 179-184.

1978a Brève note sur l'inflation, le tourisme et le Pétrole au Royaume polynésien des Iles Tonga. Journal de la Société des Océanistes, Vol. 36, No. 60:137-138.

1978b Review of A Polynesian Village: The Process of Change In the Village of Hoi, Tonga (1977) by P. Tupouniua. The Journal of the Polynesian Society, Vol. 87, No. 3: 288-289.

1977a Integrating Tourism With Other Industries in Tonga. The Social and Economic Impact of Tourism on Pacific Communities, edited by B. H. Farrell (Center for South Pacific Studies, University of California, Santa Cruz), pp. 88-94.

1977b Tourism in Tonga: Troubled Times. Hosts and Guests: The Anthropology of Tourism, edited by Valene Smith (University of Pennsylvania), pp. 83-92.

1977c Motives and Methods: Missionaries in Tonga in the Early 19th Century. The Journal of the Polynesian Society, Vol. 86, No. 2: 245-263.

1976a John Thomas, Tongans, and Tonga! The Tonga Chronicle (July 15, 1976), Nuku'alofa, Tonga, Vol. 13, No. 7: 7.

1976b Tourism in The Pacific. The Asianist (California State University, Chico), Vol. 1: 17-22.

1975a Change in Rank and Status in the Polynesian Kingdom of Tonga. Psychological Anthropology, edited by T. R. Williams (Mouton), pp. 559-575 [identical to 1979a].

1975b Drinking in the Polynesian Kingdom of Tonga. Ethnohistory, Vol. 22, No. 1: 33-50.

1974a Capt. Cook's Club. Pacific Islands Monthly, April.

1973 Tongan Adoption Before The Constitution of 1875. Ethnohistory, Vol. 20, No. 2: 109-123.

1972 Tongan Culture: The Methodology of an Ethnographic Reconstruction. Copyrighted Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon; also available from Ann Arbor, University Microfilms 73-7972); CSUC} GN/671/T5/U7/1972a]. [And please see}]

[APPENDIX III: OTHER SPECIFIC URBANOWICZ HISTORICAL WEB PAGES (in reverse chronological order]: 1965 -> 1983]

1983 Christian Missionaries in The Polynesian Kingdom of Tonga: Late 18th & Early 19th Century Activities. (For the Symposium entitled "Missions and Missionaries in the Pacific: An Overview" for the Annual Meeting of the American Historical Association, San Francisco, California, December 28.)

1980 Women in the Pacific: Some Polynesian Examples. (For the "Asia and Pacific" Section of the 28th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Ethnohistory, San Francisco, California, October 23-25, 1980.)

1977 Evolution of Technological Civilizations: What is Evolution,Technology, and Civilization? (For the Symposium on "The Search For Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence at NASA/Ames Research Center Moffett Field, California, February 24-25.)

1972 Tongan Social Structure: Data From An Ethnographic Reconstruction. For the 71st Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological Association,Toronto, Canada, December 2, 1972).

1970a Discussion. Current Direction in Anthropology: A Special Issue [Bulletins of the American Anthropological Association, Vol. 3, No. 3, Part 2], edited by Ann Fischer (Washington, D.C., American Anthropological Association), pages 55-56.

1970b Mother Nature, Father Culture. (For the 28th Annual Meeting of the Oregon Academy of Science, Eugene, February 28).

1969 A Selective View of the Intellectual Antecedents of Claude Lévi-Strauss. (For the 68th Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological Association, New Orleans, Louisiana, November 20-23, 1969.]

1968 Comments on Bronislaw Malinowski (For a University of Oregon ANTH 507 Graduate Seminar, October 29).

1967 The Classical Maya. Honors Papers (Bellingham: Western Washington University), Vol. 6: 26-32.

1965 Darwin - 1859: An Important Historical Event. (For SPEECH 100, Western Washington State College [now Western Washington University], Bellingham, Washington, June 30).

# # #

(1) © [All Rights Reserved.] [Original 1971 footnote:] Presented on November 21, 1971, at the 70th Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological Association, New York, New York. Since this paper was [submitted and] written under field conditions it must be considered a draft and hence, lacking in some citations. This paper is not for quotation in publication without the permission of the author. Funding for the research partially presented in this paper was provided (in part) by an NDEA (Title IV) Fellowship and an NIH Traineeship (PHS Grant No. 5 T01 GM01382-05). Research was conducted in Tonga from July to October 1970 and from August to October of 1971. In the intervening months research was conducted in the major libraries of Fiji, New Zealand, and Australia, with most of the research being done in the Mitchell Library, Sydney, Australia. Time was also spent examining the collections pertaining to Tonga in the library of the Bernice P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu, Hawai'i, and the libraries of the University of Hawai'i, Honolulu. [To return to the top of the paper, please click here.]

* An elaboration of this sentence is made it a yet unpublished paper, "Individuals in Tonga and Culture Change" which is to appear in a forthcoming collection of essays. [Note from August 2003: The paper referenced by the "*" was never published, although some of the information did appear in Urbanowicz 1972, 1973, 1975a, 1977c, and 1979a as listed above; to continue, please click here.]

# # #


[~ 6,388 words]} 15 August 2003

To go to the home page of Urbanowicz, please click here;

to the Department of Anthropology;

to California State University, Chico.

[This Page is printed from:]

Copyright © 2003; all rights reserved by Charles F. Urbanowicz

15 August 2003 by cfu

# # #