The Misinformed Map: An Analysis of Charles Wilkes’ Map of Hawaii in the 1840s by Sharif Gauri
The native Hawaiian perspective has been lost throughout history. Much of the language has been lost, the land has been seized, and the culture has changed. It is important to understand the process by which these losses occurred in order to slow the same process in modern Hawaii and prevent similar occurrences in native regions for the future. Primarily, this erosion of native Hawwaiian culture stems from the invasive arrival of the first European settlers. Furthermore, the majority of primary sources surrounding this event are from the European/American perspective. Juxtaposing this point of view with historical accounts from the indigenous viewpoint can offer additional insights into the history of the Pacific Ocean. One such source, a map created by naval officer Charles Wilkes on his expedition of the Pacific from 1838-1842, while maintaining native language and inspiration, fails to capture the indigenous Hawaiian perspective completely.
Wilkes’ intricately crafted map covers each Hawaiian island in depth, featuring the eight main islands along with the names of points, mountains, and towns (Wilkes). Each landmark is noted with the original native name in the water surrounding the land, and the volcanoes and mountains are well constructed to visually depict the landscape of each island.
The complexities in this map are attributable to its historical context and author. The author, Charles Wilkes, led the South Seas expedition from 1838-1842 and the “Hawaiian Group” or “Sandwich Islands” as he writes on the map, were one of the final stops on his journey (Bryan and Wilkes). The expedition was funded by congress to survey the Southern ocean, discover any islands or bodies of land which had yet to be found, and make accurate maps of each island region. In the address written about the expedition by the secretary of the navy, it was highlighted that the expedition was entirely peaceful and simply funded as scientific and exploratory (Bryan). Thus, it can be concluded that there was no militaristic intent in Wilkes’ expedition. He departed from off the coast of Virginia, and traveled around the southernmost tip of Chile at the Tierra del Fuego, and then finally traveled northwest to reach Fiji and the Hawaiian islands. He reached Hawaii around 1840, and spent much of his time employing native Hawaiians to help him haul a pendulum to the summit of Mauna Loa, before departing in the same year. The journey was first and foremost scientific, and one of Wilkes’ main goals was to measure gravity at the top of Mauna Loa using a pendulum.
The vast majority of Wilkes’ time was spent on the Big Island. Teams of Americans and employed native Hawaiians examined each volcano on the Big Island to report back to Wilkes’ superiors and the American people. They spent months examining the Big Island and all of its volcanoes, and visited the other islands briefly to build an entire map of the region. The date 1841 is written on the map itself, suggesting that Wilkes completed the map immediately after his departure from Hawaii (Bryan).
A major point of interest in the map that reflects a lack of native perspective is the intricacy used on the Big Island of Hawaii; the Big Island is the only island on the map with clear landmark labels on the inside of the island. The map shows volcanoes Mauna Kea, Mauna Hualalai, Mauna Loa, and Kilauea, all drawn out and labeled very clearly, with what appears to be more precision than the rest of the map. The regions have different textures and landscape, as well as different shades specific to each landmark. For example, the Mauna Loa volcano is white in color and smooth, which varies considerably from the dark color and rugged texture of Mauna Kea. Moreover, the districts on the Big Island (Hamakua, Hilo, Puna, Kau, Kona, and Kohala) are labeled as well as individual towns, but for the rest of the islands, only the towns are labeled. This detail would suggest that Wilkes spent significant time developing the uniqueness of each section and region of the Big Island rather than the surrounding islands. Haleakala, for instance, a volcano on Maui, is not pictured or labeled on the map at all.
Additionally, the “Kaulaka passage”, which separates Kauai and Niihau, is an outdated term and no longer used in modern maps, but it is still pictured in the Wilkes map due to the utilization of the passage for trade and commerce in the 19th century (Wilkes). In the modern day, however, these passages have lost significance. While this is not attributable to the impact of the European perspective, it is still important to note.
While Wilkes’ map accurately depicts the Hawaiian territory, it falls short in depicting the indigenous perspective completely; though it conveys accurate names for each area of native territory, it is ultimately created from the perspective of an outsider and fails to capture key elements of the native perspective in the broader historical context of the Pacific Ocean. Epeli Hau’ofa, an author from the Fiji islands, is particularly critical of accounts like Wilkes’. In his essay, “Our Sea of Islands”, Hau’ofa claims that the American, “Idea that the countries of Micronesia and Polynesia are too small, too poor, and too isolated…overlooks culture history” (Hau’ofa 151). Wilkes’ expedition utilized Hawaiians as laborers rather than as equals, and this is observable on his depiction of the Big Island on the map. There is clear intricacy of each volcano, and this was achievable through the use of many Hawaiian laborers on the Big Island assisting with the exploration of each volcano. If Wilkes’ had attempted to adequately explore the culture of each region, there would be equal detail among each of the islands, rather than a clear focus on the island on which Wilkes spent the most time. Thus, it is clear that congress funded the expedition to learn more about the areas of interest to them, rather than exploring to learn more about the culture and regions of the area as a whole.
Along the same lines, Wilkes’ depiction of the Hawaiian islands fails to account for the culture of the region, and thus misses certain geographic elements. Wilkes’ focus was exclusively scientific and missed necessary cultural components to understand the individuality of the Hawaiian islands and the people who inhabit them. David A. Chang, a professor at the University of Minnesota who specializes in the history of indigenous people, puts forth pieces of cultural evidence that offer insight into the history of the Hawaiian people in his book The World and All the Things upon It. Chang uses maps and songs as evidence to argue that the Hawaiian perspective is important and underappreciated (Chang). Furthermore, Chang contends that the Hawaiians already had existing culture and belief systems before the arrival of foreigners. Chang proves his argument by examining indigenous Hawaiian songs, one of which mentions islands that “are not in the Hawaiian archipelago” (Chang 13). Chang demonstrates that the Hawaiian people had knowledge of the land beyond their own, which Wilkes fails to acknowledge in his map of the islands, since the map only includes the eight Hawaiian islands, and depicts the region as an area completely separate from what surrounds it. There is no presence of the greater polynesian region within the map, which is likely due to the close minded interpretation that each Pacific island is completely separate from its surrounding islands. Additionally, Chang discusses how modern maps often leave off islands that have been accounted for in Hawaiian songs. “Kunehunamoku and Kahikiku are not found on contemporary maps,” he writes (Chang 19). It is likely that if Wilkes had consulted the indigenous perspective in the creation of his map, these islands would have been included. Furthermore, the majority of contemporary maps of the Hawaiian islands and all of Polynesia were created by Americans and Europeans, and are based off of Wilkes’ map among others. Wilkes’ map fails to show each Hawaiian island from the perspective of the native Hawaiians, and merely records the islands from Wilkes’ own point of view throughout his journey. Thus, not only does Wilkes’ map fail to account for the indigenous viewpoint, but as a result it is less geographically accurate. This hindrance of Wilkes’ map supports the argument put forth by both Hau’ofa and Chang: that the Native Hawaiian perspective has been largely ignored and overlooked throughout history.
Contextualizing primary sources is a valuable way to understand the history of the Pacific Ocean. However, it is also important to understand the shortcomings of each primary source. Wilkes’ map, while historically accurate, overlooks certain perspectives and nuances that existed in the historical texts and minds of the indigenous Hawaiian people. As a result, regions, cultural practices, and geographical intricacies have been missed throughout history. Understanding these limitations of historical pieces of evidence is important to develop a more cohesive and accurate representation of the history of the Pacific, both in cartography and elsewhere.
Works Cited
Bryan, G.S. “The Wilkes Exploring Expedition.” U.S. Naval Institute, 21 Feb. 2019,
www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1939/october/wilkes-exploring-expedition.
CHANG, DAVID A. The World and All the Things upon It: Native Hawaiian Geographies of
Exploration. University of Minnesota Press, 2016, pp. 1-23. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5749/j.ctt1c2crj3. Accessed 19 Feb. 2024.
Hau’ofa, Epeli. “Our Sea of Islands.” The Contemporary Pacific, vol. 6, no. 1, 1994, pp. 148–
61. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/23701593. Accessed 19 Feb. 2024.
Map of the Hawaiian Group or Sandwich Islands. Wilkes, 1845.