Kauhalalalo mo Kauhala‘uta – The Unity of the Tonga’s monarchy
In Tonga there are various heliaki used to describe the King without directly referring to him. One aspect is the use of Kauhalalalo and Kauhala‘uta. In Tongan culture, Kauhalalalo refers to the Tu‘i Ha‘atakalaua and Tu‘i Kanokupolu lines, who currently rule Tonga, while Kauhala‘uta refers exclusively to the Tu‘i Tonga line. This is because the word ‘uta also refers to inland, which implies higher rank.
‘Opeti Taliai (2007) refers even deeper to the concept and mentions the religious struggle between the two aspects – Kauhalalalo referring to the Methodists and Kauhala‘uta representing the Catholics. From a religious point, the Tu‘i Kankupolu, the current monarchs, were Methodists; whereas the Tu‘i Tonga were Catholic. Conversely, this songs is utilising this concept to describe the unity among the Tongan royalty and touches on Tongan history. Which is illustrated in the lakalaka for the village of Hā‘ano, Ha‘apai:
He toka e 'ilo meia Lo'au
Pea mo e tu'u fakatalutalu
'A 'Uta na mo e langi ne mamalu
Kauhalalalo pea mo e Hau
Ha'a Ngata mo Ha'a Havea Lahi
Ko e ngata ē tala 'a Ha'apai
Tauhi 'e Kofe mo Afeaki
'Oku tukufakaholo 'i Pangai.
Translation:
Let the knowledge derived from Lo‘au rest
and the ancient hierarchy
Of ‘Uta and the majestic Langi
Kauhalalalo and the Ruler
Ha‘a Ngata and Ha‘a Havea Lahi
There ends the tradition of Ha‘apai
Kept by Kofe and Afeaki
Passed from generation to generation at Pangai.
The lines in bold use these directly. To refer to Kauhala‘uta’s location being in Lapaha, on the eastern side of Tonga, she uses the Langi tombs where the Tu‘i Tonga and their descendants, the Kalaniuvalu line are buried. Kauhalalalo, in this case, with both the Tu‘i Ha‘atakalaua and Tu‘i Kanokupolu are connected to the ruler (Hau is the word for ruler). Hence, in most cases, songs using the Kauhalalalo and Kauhala‘uta would have the former first as it’s related to the current rulers. Though an interesting note is that Queen Sālote puts Kauhala’uta first in this lakalaka.
Though not directly using the words, the song Hala kuo Papa does touch on the unity of the Tongan monarchy in perhaps the chorus:
Ko e hala kuo papa
Talu e kilukilua
Hake 'i Vaha'akolo 'i he Ahi-mo-e-Vunga
Ka tau tuē tuē!
'Oku kei fusi 'a e fuka
'Oku kapa-'i-vai 'ōlive 'o e Hifofua
Pea 'ilo 'e he poto pea mo e kāimu'a
Kuila e Lomipeau kuo taha ai 'a e uá
Translation:
It is a path that was trodden
Since times long past
Rising at Vaha‘akolo at the Ahi and Vunga
Let us cheer and cheer!
For the flag is still raised
Still prevailing the olive branch of the Hifofua
And the wise and vocal ones know
It is the flag of the Lomipeau
That has united the two
Tongans have different interpretations regarding the importance of the song. Some state that it reminds listeners to hold steadfast to the traditions of old, as those who are considered knowledge holders will eventually go and be replaced. But in this case, the song is a present example of Tongan oral history in action. Hala kuo Papa is a retelling, in some ways, of the generational history of our Monarchy. Beginning with the Tu‘i Tonga, then onto the Tu‘i Ha‘atakalaua and eventually to the Tu‘i Kanokupolu. Eventually, our current Monarch and his family, Tupou IV and his descendants, are the proper rulers of Tonga as they hold the blood of all three royal lineages into them.
Exploring both the Maile heliaki and the heliaki of kauhalalalo and kauhala‘uta is to demonstrate the excellence of the heliaki used by Queen Sālote for a set purpose. She was able to weave the heliaki into the songs without needing to explicitly mention any names. Because of this, many of her songs were often puzzling to many modern scholars as they were unable to decipher the meanings behind the songs in some cases. An interesting theory which can be applied to this is Jakobson’s understanding of the metaphoric (substitution and similarity) and metonymic poles of language (predication, context and proximity). These are, according to Jakobson, fundamental to our understanding of the dynamism of language within human nature (Jakobson, 1956; Dirven and Pörings, 2009).
Jakobson’s argument allows cultural-specific heliaki applies to the metonymic form of language and the Universal heliaki is understood through the metaphoric pole. But while these poles are different in many ways, heliaki produces an implication that is not widely recognised within his work – that what would happen if we can find an intertwining relationship between both poles.
It is significant to point this out because Jakobson argues that the poles cannot be intertwined together as there is no subtle possibility to do so. However, it presents an interesting discrepancy, that what if the poles of language were to intertwine? This was an important question that I had asked myself as I am perusing through his work, which I then concluded that within a theory such as Jakobson’s, the metonymic and metaphoric poles of language within heliaki functions consecutively within the poetry, hence we cannot use a European way of thinking about literary theory within an otherwise indigenous perspective that has been continuous for many generations.