It must be..

Dec 2018
1,438
19
U.S
#1
It must be, not as in it 'has to be', but it must be... that.... the claims made which are much more 'defended' by righteousness than not, are true(er) than not. Why else would it receive righteous 'defense' to the 'claim' if the claim, whatever it may be, is not true and valid?
 
Dec 2018
1,438
19
U.S
#2
It is a 'good' thing, at least. At least a shift towards this is ocurring because in the past the claims which were being 'defended' were on the 'side(s)' of the children rather than on the side(s) of the parent(s).
 
Dec 2018
1,438
19
U.S
#3
Kamehameha founded the Kingdom of Hawaiʻi with the conquest of Oʻahu in 1795. Hawaiʻi would not be unified until the islands of Kauaʻi and Niʻihau surrendered under King Kaumualiʻi in 1810. Kamehameha III moved his capital from Lāhainā, Maui to Honolulu, Oʻahu in 1845. ʻIolani Palace, built later by other members of the royal family, is still standing, and is the only royal palace on American soil.

Oahu - Wikipedia


However before this, I believe the only ones that referred to themselves as Hawaiians were those of the rulership/leader of the Island of Hawaii. What they referred to themselves who were under the leadership/rulership of Oahu, for example, is unclear unless they did not differentiate themselves, one from another, being of the same 'language' speakers.

-

The island has been inhabited since at least 3rd century A.D.[6] The 304-year-old Kingdom of Oʻahu was once ruled by the most ancient aliʻi in all of the Hawaiian Islands.

-

Oahu - Wikipedia
 
Last edited:

Similar Discussions