CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · Places & Architecture

Mount Fito

mountain in Samoa

Architectural plans, a scale model, maps and brass measuring instruments
Places and architectureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionAug 15, 2026
Entity authorityQ31672770
Source-derived summary

Mount Fito (Mauga Fito) is the second-highest mountain on the island of Upolu in Samoa. It is located in the O Le Pupu-Puʿe National Park in the Atua district and has a height of 1149m. Fito was long-believed to be Upolu's highest point, but a visit by the Samoa Conservation Society in 2022 determined it to be the second-highest, just 10m shorter than nearby Mount Vaivai.

In 1978 a Cessna aircraft operated by South Pacific Island Airways crashed into the mountain, killing all 11 people on board.

Editorial summary

“Mount Fito” enters the record as mountain in Samoa. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Mount, Fito and mountain can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewMost useful as a place-based finding aid connecting the present description to earlier jurisdictions, maps and built evidence. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2022, 1978—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around Mount, Fito and mountain.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“Mount Fito” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Mount, Fito and mountain provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

The strongest evidence will usually combine a dated visual record with documents produced by the authority responsible for the place. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 15, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q31672770. Authority coordinates are -13.952, -171.684. 1 of 1 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 2022 and 1978.

Critical limits

Modern boundaries and familiar names can conceal earlier jurisdictions or structures that do not align with the present site. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Treat names, boundaries and functions as historically changeable. Maps, plans, inventories and administrative records can clarify what the place meant at different dates.

Best used for
  • Historic place names
  • Jurisdictional context
  • Routes into maps and plans
Verify next

Contemporary maps, plans, listed-building records, estate papers and the responsible local or national archive.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Mount Fito”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Mount Fito primary sources, Mount Fito archive and Mount research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Mount Fito”?
  2. Which earlier names or jurisdictions may reveal additional records?
  3. What physical evidence or contemporary plan supports the description?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Mount Fito” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.