I REFER to the opinion piece (FT 02/01) by Alivate Mataitini purporting to set the record straight about Ro Veidovi and would be grateful for an opportunity to respond.
Alivate discussed at length the commentary I voluntarily gave Fiji TV for the vernacular program Noda Gauna, which was re-screened on the evening of Monday, December 28.
First and foremost I wish to state that the comments I made on Fiji TV and to other members of the media, were with the full knowledge and approval of my Gone Marama Bale Na Roko Tui Dreketi, who was hosting members of the media to lunch at Valelevu.
These comments were made in my traditional role as the Sauturaga, Chief Advisor of the Roko Tui Dreketi
The recent resurgence of interest in the life story of Ro Veidovi stems from a very generous invitation which was extended in recognition of the Gone Marama Bale, as the direct descendant of Ro Veidovi and the current Roko Tui Dreketi, by the Smithsonian Institution in Washington D.C. through the United States Embassy here in Suva.
Because the invitation was received by the Gone Marama Bale on the eve of her departure for Los Angeles in June last year, the invitation was not discussed until her return.
At the suggestion of the Smithsonian Institution and the Embassy of the United States, we have attempted to involve the media in retelling and sharing with the people of Rewa the fascinating life of Ro Veidovi and have also approached the Permanent Secretary for Information to involve the Government Archives in this invitation.
In planning our response to this invitation we have also fully informed the Permanent Secretary for Indigenous Affairs and the Permanent Secretary for Foreign Affairs.
While some historical events are lost in the mist of time and relegated to unsubstantiated oral history please allow me to respond to some very serious and offensive allegations made by Alivate regarding the story of Ro Veidovi.
To call Ro Veidovi a murderer is extremely offensive. In the historical context of the time, Ro Veidovi was a warrior chieftain and he was renown throughout the delta and the surrounding islands as a chief to be reckoned with.
If as Alivate implies, Ro Veidovi was bent on undermining the authority of the Roko Tui Dreketi, Ro Kania Banuve, why would he have so willingly given himself up to go to the ship Peacock where the members of Valelevu were being held. This was because of his respect and love for the Roko Tui Dreketi and the members of Valelevu held captive aboard.
Alivate also mentions that Ro Qaraniqio was not the vunivalu at the time.
In the published diary of the Methodist missionary John Hunt, The Inheritance of Hope, (pp: 117) it is clearly stated that Ro Qaraniqio was indeed and in fact the vunivalu at that time. Records of the Catholic Church also mention the same, which is in accordance with the oral history we were taught as children.
The Veceli Musudroka recorded in history is from Namosi and what we do know is that Veceli's descendants still live amongst us in Lomanikoro.
Also to state that Commodore Wilkes named Vendovi Island in the Puget Sound off Washington State "to humour the sorrowful Veidovi," is merely repeating a very subjective conjecture and reflects more of the unkind disposition of the writer rather than a true reflection of the relationship between Commodore Wilkes and Ro Veidovi.
All of the information I relayed to the media including Fiji TV was as a result of written historical documents and not something I nor members of Valelevu created to alter the life story of Ro Veidovi.
If he had bothered to ask me, I would have been more than willing to share with Alivate the books and documents from which I gathered the facts of Ro Veidovi.
For Alivate to imply embellishment is not only mischievous but extremely disrespectful to the members of Valelevu and to me personally.
It is also very presumptious of Alivate to place the history of Ro Veidovi in perspective as he carries no mandate from Ro Veidovi's direct descendants.
In closing Alivate claims Ro Veidovi was a victim of the circumstances and the time in which he lived, which is in direct contradiction of his rather vitriolic opinion piece, in which he has lambasted the memory of our high chief.
It is unfortunate and ill informed of Alivate to judge the actions and life of Ro Veidovi from a modern day perspective and not from the historical and social context in which this high chief lived his life.
If Ro Veidovi were present to defend his story today, I rather suspect Alivate would be singing a completely different tune.
On Monday the previous week, the members of Valelevu led by the Gone Marama Bale visited the chiefly household of the Ratu Mai Verata at Nasobasoba.
This is because, like all Fijians the world over, they are proud and happy to acknowledge and affirm their past, and their chiefly ties which are still being maintained today. With all of its highs and lows, the lessons of the past make us what we are now.
For example in Rewa we are not foolishly proud but humbled that Reverend Cross brought the Living Word to Rewa resulting in the dissemination of the Gospel through the vei Mataki network in Viti Levu. We are humbly proud that this was God's plan for Rewa and would never renounce the decision of the Roko Tui Dreketi to accept Christianity.
Perhaps Alivate should seriously examine why he wishes to renounce his past, because we in the delta lands of Rewa only wish to learn from our history and environment that has made us what we celebrate today.
Over the New Year's Eve weekend I was summoned by my Gone Marama Bale Na Roko Tui Dreketi, Adi Teimumu V. Kepa, to Valelevu and she has requested I convey to all who are genuinely connected to Valelevu through blood and vanua ties and have the interest of Rewa and Burebasaga at heart, that this should be our last joint response to Alivate Mataitini's opinion piece about our late chiefly ancestor, Ro Veidovi.
May his soul now rest in peace.
* Dona Tuicaumia Takalaiyale is sauturaga of Navolau, Lomanikoro in Rewa.
ON Monday, December 28, Noda Gauna presented the story of Ro Veidovi, the half-brother of the then Roko Tui Dreketi, Ro Banuve, also known as Ro Kania.
While it made for interesting viewing, the information provided by Dona Takalaiyale was not factual.
Takalaiyale's attempts to gloss over what was essentially one of the more infamous periods in Rewa's history with supposed proper chiefly behaviour ultimately demeans those who were affected at the time by Ro Veidovi's criminal act.
By Ro Veidovi's arrest and transport to New York, the Roko Tui Dreketi also lost a brother.
Indeed, the actions of Ro Veidovi brought to the fore the vindictive character of the Americans who, like all colonialists, would not let such an action go unpunished, especially when committed by a native.
Ten people lost their lives through Ro Veidovi's deception.
Those whose bodies were recovered were buried at sea, only to float to the surface to be eaten by the very people who slew them.
So instead of trying to embellish the character of Ro Veidovi, one should put things in their proper perspective and admit that he really was nothing more than a mischief-maker who sought to undermine the authority of the Roko Tui Dreketi, Ro Banuve at every turn, and someone who was ultimately a murderer who was arrested and sent to the United States in New York to serve his sentence there.
Ro Veidovi was directly responsible for the murder on September 5, 1834 in Ono, Kadavu of ten crew members of the American brig Charles Doggett. Eight of these men were American. Their deaths were witnessed by a beachcomber, Paddy Connel, who was aboard the Charles Doggett which was anchored off Ono.
Connel was the chief witness when Ro Veidovi was brought to justice six year later.
Ro Veidovi voluntarily gave himself up on May 22, 1840 after being persuaded by his half-brother, Ro Qaraniqio to do so, since their brother and Roko Tui Dreketi, Ro Banuve and his entourage were being held hostage overnight aboard the Peacock.
The vessel was one of four of a squadron of ships commanded by Commodore Charles Wilkes on a scientific expedition of the Pacific. Commodore Wilkes had been instructed by the United States Navy to bring Ro Veidovi to Brooklyn.
It has be said here that Ro Qaraniqio was not the Vunivalu as claimed by Dona Takalaiyale in Noda Gauna.
The Vunivalu at the time was Ro Veceli Musudroka, who was also aboard the Peacock as a member of the Roko Tui Dreketi's party.
In volunteering to bring back Ro Veidovi, Ro Qaraniqio was not doing this out of any interest other than his own.
Ro Veidovi was his main rival in the impending struggle for the title of Roko Tui Dreketi once the incumbent, Ro Banuve died.
With Ro Veidovi out of the way, the path was clear for his eventual assumption of the title.
Nevertheless, the reality was that the Americans cared little about who was the Roko Tui Dreketi, so long as the reverence with which the title was held by all Rewans was enough to compel Ro Veidovi to give himself up.
Simply put, Ro Veidovi was a murderer and he had to be brought to justice.
He was put in chains and the Peacock proceeded to continue on its expedition back to America.
The vessel ran aground off the Columbia River and Ro Veidovi was transferred aboard the Vincennes, flagship of Commodore Wilkes.
So Ro Veidovi was aboard the Vincennes, not the Peacock, when it arrived in New York on July 11, 1842.
He was said to have been heartbroken when the master's mate, Benjamin Vanderford, his close friend during the two year journey from Fiji to New York died (documents say that Commodore Wilkes named one of the islands off Puget Sound Vendovi Island, essentially "to humour sorrowful Vendovi").
However, he had contracted pulmonary tuberculosis during the long journey and died two hours after arrival.
He was buried at the Brooklyn Naval Cemetery and later re-interred at the Cypress Hills National Cemetery in New York.
That Ro Veidovi became a celebrity was therefore far-fetched.
His death was indeed of interest to New York's penny press at the time, but more for the method with which his head was detached from the rest of his body to be added to a collection at the Smithsonian Institute called the "The National Cabinet of Curiosities".
Fifteen years ago, I was studying in New York when my wife, Leba visited me from home.
Together with Ratu Naiqama Lalabalavu (now Tui Cakau and who was then undergoing post-graduate studies in Washington) and Lui Vunibobo, we went to the Cypress Hills National Cemetery to visit Ro Veidovi's grave.
We were pointed to the site, but the spot was bare where he was supposed to have been buried.
There was no headstone; neither were there any other indications to suggest that we were at grave.
But we did feel a connection and that was all we needed to assure us that we were indeed standing at his gravesite.
Leba had brought a piece of masi and a bouquet of flowers, which she laid on the site.
We said a short prayer for the repose of Ro Veidovi's soul and left.
The quest to know one's past to be able to face the future better, however, can never be achieved when the objective is blurred because the inevitable result will be economy with the truth.
Recent articles and comments on Ro Veidovi have tended toward being pompous and overweening, bordering on the narcissistic.
Rather than pulling skeletons out of the closet, it would be much more beneficial for those living in the present to respect each other, making sure that in thought, word and action, the motive for anything we set out to do must be right before God.
Ro Veidovi was an essential element in the history of Rewa, but his role must be placed in its proper perspective.
He was a victim of his own generation, subject to the atrocities of the time like murder, abuse and cannibalism, memories of which can only be expunged by the telling of the truth, rather than an embellishment of what were really acts that should never be condoned.
Really, the past is not something to be proud of.
As a Christian, I say these past actions should be renounced; not repeated as folklore. A blessed 2010 to all.
* Ro Alipate Mataitini is the son of the Vunivalu of Rewa, Ro Epeli Mataitini and is a lawyer by profession.
