Kingdom of Hawaii

“With respect, your interpretations, assumptions.”
I can assure you they are not my interpretation or my assumptions but documented facts.
Are we at crossed lines with the Royal Guards, and the volunteer mainly European Honolulu Rifles?

“don't think you get the big picture about my writing and illustrating of this book.”
If the big picture is a regimental history, then how can you ignore their actions, or fail to see that they were treasonable?
Although as a uniform book, great, a subject that’s being overlooked for far too long.

I’m also certainly not claiming that you haven’t put a great deal of effort into the book, and I’m certainly not claiming to have a superior knowledge of, or criticizing your knowledge of the Hawaiian military.
I did however love the polite put down, with just enough superiority without being arrogant.

My comments regarding the Rifles being treacherous and having a hand in the political interference of the Europeans is well documented, along with Ashford being one of, if not the main driving forces behind their association with the Hawaiian League, and their goal for the annexation of Hawaii. Which he later claimed to regret.
Is that also wrong?

So are you claiming that your research disproves that the regiment was pro Hawaiian League?
Did your research prove that the regiment had no connections to the Hawaiian League (Missionary Party)?
Are you saying the regiment wasn’t behind those who forced the King to sign the constitution of 1887?
Are you claiming that any of the regiments actions couldn’t be claimed to be treasonable under the Hawaiian Penal code of 1888, which I believe was still in force at the time?

Then there’s the issue regarding the Rifles taking control of many of the government building, and disarming the Loyal militias that aided the annexation of Hawaii.
Are you saying that also didn’t happen?

From the British Consul;
“The new Administration which was dictated by the “Honolulu Rifles” now 300 strong does not give universal satisfaction, and…Attorney General Ashford is reported to have said ‘that they, the Administration, would carry the elections if necessary at the point of the bayonet.’”
There’s also written evidence as to how workers were taken to vote on mass by the overseers to vote for their employers. Many of whom had connections with the regiment and the Hawaiian League.
I suppose this also didn’t happen?

Taking orders from an undemocratic administration that (the Committee for Safety) was mainly made up of foreign business men, Europeans, and pro annexation Hawaiians without the authority of the Queen was actually treason.
I assume that you will disagree.

So I’ll end with the assumption that you as “an individual with Hawaiian heritage and ancestry” firmly believes that the Europeans of the Honolulu Rifles played no part in the treacherous overthrow of the Hawaiian Monarchy.
With all due respect that’s very naive, especially if one takes into consideration the political nature of Hawaii during the later part of the 19th century.

History is often written by the victors, and by changing the narrative by whitewashing the truth and failing to mention any wrongs committed. Take the Indian wars for example, Hawaii is just another victim of greed and empire building. But according to the records it was the will of the people.
I afraid that we will have to disagree in this case as to what constitutes treason.

I can't believe I spent considerable time in reply to wfrad's posting, and through my error, probably in the posting procedure, erased it all.  I will attempt to make my similar and shortened comments now.

The sole purpose of my research was to answer my own questions as to the units (and their uniforms) which existed during Hawaii's Monarchy years, and to perhaps share my answers by illustrations and other information gained in a book.  As a collector of dress helmets from allover the world during the period 1815 to 1915 (which consisted of over 90 helmets passing through the collection over 34 years), I wanted to know of the uniforms of the Royal Guards of the Hawaiian Kingdom, particularly their headdress.  I have had the privilege of viewing the military artifacts of both the Bishop Museum and the Iolani Palace (who don't share the items in their respective museums).  Hours were spent in the State Archives and State Libraries, in addition to reading the microfiche files of newspapers of the period, viewing unpublished photos of parades and funeral processions, reading society publications and many works chronicling Hawaii's history. 

I have no intention as to showing arrogance, but do hope to give provenance to my findings and the knowledge gained from the effort of more than 10 years of research.  I know well of the Ashfords and the other members of the Honolulu Rifles.  I am not here to argue for or against the treachery of the Honolulu Rifles, or any other organization, and their political participation in the Hawaiian League, the Bayonet Constitution, the Society for Safety, nor to give judgment right or wrong as to the rulings of the Monarchs.  It is you who has made assumptions that I support and agree with the actions of the Honolulu Rifles and the other parties seeking the Kingdom's end.  You have missed the point again....I am only revealing my findings as to the uniforms, accoutrements and awarded decorations of the Hawaiian Army.  I should  also like to point out that your use of "regiments" is inaccurate as here is quoted the proper terminology in regard to the units: "a permanent unit of an army typically commanded by a colonel and divided into several companies, squadrons, or batteries and often into two battalions".  The Hawaiian militia units/companies were certainly not permanent, not strong in numbers, questionably a "company", and not regimental by any means.


So there you have it...I've illustrated and compiled findings on what has long been unknown knowledge of the uniforms of the never more than 500 men who constituted Hawaii's Army for fifty years, The Kings' Men.


Mahalo for your comments and interest.

Thank you, you’ve mad you stance much clearer, my mistake.
“some of whom, who were also members of the Honolulu Rifles....not Hawaiians.”
Although most were white business men, considering the make up of the unit it’s hard to believe that there were no Hawaiians were also involved.
I made no assumption about your personal stance or beliefs, my replies were to counter your claim
that there was no treachery within the Rifles. As for them being “The Kings Mens” that’s another subject entirely as most weren’t nationals, but We will have to agree to disagree on that point, as you say, it has nothing to do with the uniforms.

As for; “I should also like to point out that your use of "regiments" is inaccurate as here is quoted the proper terminology in regard to the units: "a permanent unit of an army typically commanded by a colonel and divided into several companies, squadrons, or batteries and often into two battalions". The Hawaiian militia units/companies were certainly not permanent,”

Guilty as charged for the inaccurate use of “regiment” for smaller formations, easier just to use the term ‘regiment’ to generalise, but inaccurate.
That said, you could also say that your “proper terminology” “permanent unit” is also inaccurate.
Regiments aren’t permanent either in size or standing, they come and go depending on service requirements. The same is true for the number of battalions in any given regiment at any given time. Many British regiments have had in the past over twenty temporary battalions. There’s also been in many nations temporary regiments raised just for war service, for example the American Civil War.

The book, I’m in no way trying to discredit the amount of work you’ve put into the book, or anything in the book.
It’s a much needed work on a subject that’s never received the attention it deserves.

My treason comment wasn’t intended to insult you, or those who loyally served in those units.
Just pointing out some of the treachery that many wanted buried and forgotten.

As for posting, the site seems to be entertaining a few gremlins.
Thanks, it’s been interesting