Slavery as an industrial system

All authors agree that the Maori of New Zealand had slaves; and the many details they give prove that slavery really existed259.

The Tongans, according to Meinicke, had slaves, partly prisoners of war, partly condemned criminals260. Gerland, referring to a missionary report, speaks of slaves, tamaiveiki261. But in his very minute description of Tongan government and social classes262 he gives no more particulars about these slaves; and Mariner who, according to Gerland, is very reliable263, makes no mention of slavery. Mariner enumerates five social classes; the lowest class were the tooas, the bulk of the people, consisting of a. a few warriors, b. professed cooks in the service of the chiefs, c. those who tilled the soil and had no [98]other occupation264. Mariner only makes mention of captive women, so it is probable that no men were taken prisoners in their wars265. West states that there was a monarchical despotism, supported by an hereditary aristocracy. The people were divided into several, strictly separated, classes. The lowest class where the tuas, common people, subdivided into different trades: carpenters, fishermen, etc. The feudal principle, that the whole country belonged exclusively to the king, made the people slaves266. Such “slavery” of a whole people is not, however, slavery in the true sense of the word. Of slavery proper West makes as little mention as Mariner. We may, therefore, safely suppose that Meinicke and Gerland have been mistaken, and that slavery did not exist here.

With reference to Samoa Gerland speaks of two political parties who were always at war, “but they do not destroy their adversaries”, he says, “nor enslave them, as frequently members of the same family belong to different parties”267. According to Meinicke the prisoners were at different times differently disposed of; but among these modes of treatment slavery is not mentioned268. Wilkes states that their wars “were attended with great cruelty, and neither old or young of either sex were spared”269. Turner, a good authority, remarks: “Prisoners, if men, were generally killed; if women, distributed among the conquerors”270. We are not told whether these women were married, or kept in a slave-like state; but even in the last case this would be slavery of women only, and therefore not slavery in the proper sense. Krämer is the only author who speaks of slaves. The conquered party had to ask the pardon of the conquerors and to bring firewood as if to show that they considered themselves worth to be eaten like pigs. Often also they had to perform degrading work as slaves (pologa), to pay a tribute or even to furnish human flesh for cannibal purposes271. It would seem that this degrading work was imposed upon the conquered as a temporary punishment and that we have not to deal here with a permanent system of forced labour as among slave-keeping tribes. This being the only [99]reference to slavery in Krämer’s very detailed description of the Samoans, and slavery not being mentioned by any of our other informants272, we may safely infer that it did not exist.

Gardiner, in his excellent article on Rotuma, says: “Slaves as such did not properly exist”273.

Gerland and Meinicke, enumerating the social classes in the Rarotonga group (or Hervey Islands, or Cook’s Islands), make no mention of slaves. According to Meinicke, the lowest class are the common people274. So slavery seems to have been unknown here.

In Tahiti, according to Ellis, “the lowest class included the titi and the teuteu, the slaves and servants; the former were those who had lost their liberty in battle, or who, in consequence of the defeat of the chieftains to whom they were attached, had become the property of the conquerors. This kind of slavery appears to have existed among them from time immemorial. Individuals captured in actual combat, or who fled to the chief for protection when disarmed or disabled in the field, were considered the slaves of the captor or chief by whom they were protected. The women, children and others who remained in the districts of the vanquished, were also regarded as belonging to them; and the lands they occupied, together with their fields and plantations, were distributed among the victors.… If peace continued, the captive frequently regained his liberty after a limited servitude, and was permitted to return to his own land, or remain in voluntary service with his master”275. Though the second kind of slaves Ellis enumerates, the subjects of vanquished chiefs, probably were not slaves, and the frequent liberating of captive slaves proves that slavery was not of great significance, it would seem from Ellis’s account that to a limited extent it was present. Another ancient writer, however, tells us that the lowest class were the common servants, called toutou, or, when they were in the service of women, tuti. Nobody was obliged to serve longer than he liked. The manahoune or peasants, who worked for the nobility, were also free to change their master or remove to another district. Hence we should infer that slavery did not [100]exist276. Moerenhout says: In the Society Islands there were no slaves; the people served the chiefs voluntarily. Prisoners of war, men, women, and children, were almost always mercilessly murdered277. Considering the details given by Ellis, who was very well informed, we are inclined, notwithstanding the contrary statements of the other writers, to conclude that slavery existed in Tahiti, but we are not quite certain about it.

Of Hawaii Ellis says: “The wives and children of those whom they had defeated were frequently made slaves, and attached to the soil for its cultivation, and, together with the captives, treated with great cruelty.” Captives were sometimes spared, “though perhaps spared only to be slaves, or to be sacrificed when the priests should require human victims. The persons of the captives were the property of the victors, and their lives entirely at their disposal.” But in enumerating the social classes he makes no mention of slaves. “In the fourth [lowest] rank may be included the small farmers, who rent from ten to twenty or thirty acres of land; the mechanics … indeed, all the labouring classes, those who attach themselves to some chief or farmer, and labour on his land for their food and clothing, as well as those who cultivate small portions of land for their own advantage”278. In the accounts of the other writers, who knew the ancient institutions of Hawaii by observation or personal information, we do not find anything tending to prove that slavery existed. Wilkes, in his very detailed account of government and land tenure, does not speak of slaves. “The authority” he says “descended in the scale of rank, rising from the lowest class of servants to tenants, agents, landholders, land-owners, petty chiefs, high chiefs, and the king”279. Chamisso expressly states that slavery was absent. The common people were entirely subjected to the chiefs, but there were no slaves or serfs. Peasants and servants were allowed to remove to any place they liked. The people were free; they could be killed, but not sold or retained280. Remy tells us that the common people were heavily oppressed by the chiefs. Slaves are not mentioned by him. Prisoners were sacrificed281. All this renders the existence [101]of slavery in ancient Hawaii very improbable and so we think we are justified, notwithstanding the second-hand information, furnished by Meinicke, that there were a few slaves282, and Marcuse’s short remark, that “to allure the sharks, they occasionally made human sacrifices, especially among the slaves”283, in concluding that slavery did not exist.

Hale states that in the Marquesas Islands there were no slaves284. The same follows from Radiguet’s description. According to this writer, the natives were divided into the nobles and the common people. The latter served the nobles, but were free at any time to leave their employers285. According to Meinicke prisoners were either sacrificed and eaten, or spared and adopted into the conquering tribe286. De Rocquefeuil also states that the prisoners were eaten, unless, by the priests’ intervention, they were buried; at any rate they were killed287. Moerenhout tells us that the sole object of their wars was to obtain a cannibal repast288. From all this we may safely infer that there were no slaves and that Gerland, stating that “slaves were rare; like the foreigners, who were always regarded as enemies, they had no rights, could be quite arbitrarily treated and even killed”289, has mistaken for slaves persons intended to be sacrificed. Letourneau holds the same view of the matter: “Everything seems to indicate, that slavery did not exist in the Marquesas Islands”290.

The natives of Tukopia, according to Gerland, formerly kept slaves, who were prisoners of war291. No more details are given.

Wilkes, speaking of the Paumotu group, observes that Anaa or Chain Island “is said to contain five thousand inhabitants, which large number is accounted for by the conquest of the other islands, and taking their inhabitants off as captives”. The influence of the missionaries caused a change in “the treatment of their captives, whom they allowed to return, if they chose, to their own island; but very many of them had married at Anaa, and became permanent residents there, and [102]few have taken advantage of the permission to return”292. Whether the captives mentioned here were kept as slaves is not clear. Moerenhout tells us that the natives of the Paumotu group often preserved their prisoners to eat them later on at feasts293. We cannot arrive at a definite conclusion here.

Geiseler states that on Easter Island male prisoners of war were formerly eaten. Captured women and girls, however, were not killed, but given to young warriors. Slaves are not mentioned. The king had absolute power over the common people294. It would seem that slavery was absent here; but we are not quite certain about it, as Geiseler describes a state of things existing long before his visit to the island.

In the Abgarris, Marqueen and Tasman groups, according to Parkinson, there are three social classes, the chiefs and their parents, the nobles and priests, and the common people295. Hence we may safely infer, that slavery does not exist.