Slavery as an industrial system

Tromp and Macdonald, describing the Caffres in general, make no mention of slavery531. Waitz remarks: “The poor join the rich as their “children”, live in servitude, and are often exposed to heavy oppression and arbitrary treatment; but they are not slaves in the true sense: slavery proper does not exist.” “The conquered are not enslaved, the conqueror requires only subjection; whereas often the object of their wars is the capturing of cattle rather than of men”532. [139]

The Ama-Xosa are described by Fritsch. War is seldom sanguinary, its main object being cattle-stealing; but if the attacked defend their cattle energetically, a general slaughter ensues; women and children are killed without discrimination. Fugitive enemies are mercilessly slaughtered. When a chief has great renown, he gets many followers, who crowd towards him from all sides and contribute to the enlargement of his power; for it is a custom among the Caffres never to deliver up a fugitive whatever the reason of his fleeing from his native country. The chiefs punish insurgents by taking away their cattle; then they are poor men without any influence in the tribe. These particulars make the existence of slavery improbable: no prisoners are taken, fugitives and insurgents are not enslaved. In one place, however, Fritsch speaks of slaves. The Fengu, remnants of destroyed tribes, fell into the hands of the Ama-Xosa, who spared the lives of these fugitives, but kept them in wretched bondage. “In 1835, after this slave-state had lasted for more than ten years, when the Caffres were at war with the colony, the Fengu begged the Governor Sir Benjamin d’Urban to liberate them. The Governor, complying with the request, sent troops to enable them to depart, and so at once 16800 men, women and children with what little cattle and other property they had, established themselves in the colony”533. It is clear that these Fengu were not slaves. That they could depart in such large numbers from the country of the Ama-Xosa, proves that they lived more or less separate. They were weaker tribes subjected by a stronger one; we shall see that this occurs very often in South Africa. The tribes were subjected as tribes, not the individuals as such; therefore they were not slaves. Kropf, who lived among the Ama-Xosa as a missionary for 42 years, describes them as they were some 70 years ago. In his detailed account he does not speak of slaves. Male prisoners were killed, women and children were sometimes left alive. We are not told what was the fate of these women and children. There were no social classes, the whole people, from the chief down to the last of his subjects, regarding themselves as one family534. From all this we may safely infer that slavery did not exist among the Ama-Xosa. [140]

In his description of the Ama-Zulu Fritsch makes no mention of slavery. Livingstone says: “Zulus do not usually destroy any save the old, and able-bodied men. The object of their raids in general is that the captured women and children may be embodied into the tribe, and become Zulus. The masters of the captives are kind to them, and children are put on the same level as those of any ordinary man. In their usual plan, we seem to have the condition so bepraised by some advocates for slavery. The members of small disunited communities are taken under a powerful government, obtain kind masters, whom they are allowed to exchange for any one else within the tribe, and their children become freemen.… The Zulus are said never to sell their captives”535. These captives who are “embodied into the tribe, and become Zulus,” and are never sold, certainly are not slaves.

The Matabele are a division of the Zulus, who in 1820 separated from the mother-country. Their mode of life still bears much resemblance to that of the Zulus536. Livingstone remarks: “Among the coast tribes a fugitive is almost always sold, but here [i.e. among the Zulus] a man retains the same rank he held in his own tribe. The children of captives even have the same privileges as the children of their captors.” The Rev. T. M. Thomas, a missionary now living with Moselekatse, finds the same system prevailing among his Zulu or Matabele. He says that “the African slave, brought by a foray to the tribe, enjoys, from the beginning, the privileges and name of a child and looks upon his master and mistress in every respect as his new parents. He is not only nearly his master’s equal, but he may, with impunity, leave his master and go wherever he likes within the boundary of the kingdom: although a bondman or servant, his position, especially in Moselekatse’s country, does not convey the true idea of a state of slavery; for, by care and diligence, he may soon become a master himself, and even more rich and powerful than he who led him captive.” The practice pursued by these people, on returning from a foray, of selling the captives to each other for corn or cattle, might lead one to imagine, that slavery existed in all its intensity among the [141]native Africans; but Mr. Thomas, observing, as we have often done, the actual working of the system, says very truly: “Neither the punctuality, quickness, thoroughness, nor amount of exertion is required by the African as by the European master. In Europe the difficulty is want of time, in Africa, what is to be done with it. Apart from the shocking waste of life, which takes place in these and all slave forays, their slavery is not so repulsive as it always becomes in European hands”537. Kerr states, that the masters must pay for the offences committed by their slaves538. Holub’s account throws quite another light on the subject. The captured boys are given to warriors in order to be instructed by them in warfare; those already accustomed to the use of weapons are instantly enrolled into the army. Female captives are lent to warriors. The king used yearly to make raids on the neighbouring countries; on these occasions thousands were slaughtered. Besides the men, old women no longer able to work, infants and young children were killed. When Mackenzie in 1863 visited Matabeleland, he found but a few Zulu-warriors. Most men in the prime of life were Bechuanas, whom the king had either captured or exacted as a tax. The regiments of young men consisted mainly of Makalaka and Mashona youths. In time of peace they had to tend the cattle, and on their return home to exercise themselves in the use of weapons539. Can these statements be brought to agree? It may be, that Holub’s account relates to a period of strong but short-lived despotism, such as so often occurs among these tribes, and Livingstone’s description to a more peaceful time. It may also be, that both relate to the same period, Livingstone not mentioning their military organization. Though Thomas (quoted by Livingstone) speaks of slaves, it is not easy to make out, whether the captives were really slaves; we should rather think not, as they were allowed to leave their masters and go wherever they liked. At any rate slavery, if it exists, is not much developed, the chief function of slaves probably being reinforcement of the tribe in warfare.

The Bechuana group consists of several tribes, the principal being, according to Schurtz540, the Basuto, the Makololo, the [142]Bamangwato, the Bakwains and the Bakalahari. Fritsch, describing the Bechuanas in general, makes no mention of slaves. According to Holub, however, they have Makalahiri slaves541. But from some particulars it appears that these Makalahiri are rather a tribe subjected as a whole than individual slaves. “These Makalahiri have to live in the more western parts, where game is plentiful, and have to kill the game and bring the spoil to their masters, who live in parts where the water is more abundant.” They are employed as hunters or herdsmen. “If a Makalahiri servant behaves well and kills a good many ostriches for his master, he is allowed to marry a Bechuana woman”542. Conder describes the Makalahiri as “nomadic hunters, living chiefly in the west, and considered in the light of serfs of the chief”543. It is clear that these hunters, living away from the Bechuanas, and considered as “serfs of the chiefs,” are a subjected tribe and not individual slaves. There are two other tribes subjected to the Bechuanas: the Barwa or Masarwa, and the Madenassana. That these are servile tribes and not slaves, appears still more clearly than with the Makalahiri544. Hence we should infer that the Bechuanas have no slaves. We shall presently see whether this conclusion agrees with the information we get about the single tribes belonging to this group.

According to Casalis, who was intimately acquainted with the Basutos, slavery was unknown among them, the servile work being performed by the women and children. Prisoners of war were admitted to be ransomed545.

The Batauana are described by Passarge. Though he calls them a division of the Basutos, the state of things among them, as regards slavery, is quite different from that among the Basutos. Passarge speaks of slaves kept by them and also of tribes subjected by them, but living in separate settlements and leading a tribal life. Whether the so-called slaves are identical with the members of the subjected tribes or whether they are slaves in the proper sense, is not clear546. [143]

Livingstone tells us that the Makololo never make slaves. In another work he relates, how once a troop of Matabele was starving on an island; the Makololo finding them killed the adult people and adopted the rest. Formerly there was no slave-trade; now captured children are the object of it547. The Makololo therefore have no slaves.

As to the Bakwains, Livingstone speaks of a woman who, as a punishment for theft, became the property of the injured party548. But we do not know, whether she was intended to be sold abroad or to be kept as a slave. Holub speaks of Barwa and Makalahiri in a servile condition; but these are probably subjected tribes and not slaves549.

Joest informs us that among the Barolong there are descendants of slaves, though not treated as such, who live with most of their families. They tend the cattle; their name “Bakhalahari” vouches for their western origin550. Perhaps they are a division of the same Makalahiri we have met with as a tribe subjected to the Bechuanas. But the statement that they live with Barolong families is more suggestive of slavery; they may, however, be free labourers. We cannot arrive here at any definite conclusion.

The Angoni are great slave-traders, but also keep domestic slaves. Wiese and Kerr give some particulars regarding their slave-system551.

Junod gives a detailed description of the Baronga, living near Delagoa Bay. Slaves were formerly sold on a large scale to the coast people. Whether the Baronga themselves kept slaves does not appear552.

Among the Vawenda the children of sorcerers are sold as slaves; whether at home or abroad we are not told553. No more particulars being given, we do not know whether slavery exists here.

Theal, describing the Makalanga or Makaranga, tells us of a chief who offered female slaves to the whites554. But this short note is by no means sufficient for us to go upon. [144]

The Ovampo, according to Galton, have members of foreign tribes living among them in a state of subjection; but whether these people are slaves in the true sense is not clear. “I cannot speak with certainty” he says “of the exact standing in which the Damaras and the Bushmen severally live among the Ovampo. The first are employed principally as cattle-watchers; the second, who are even more ornamented than the Ovampo themselves, are a kind of standing army; but I have great reason to doubt whether either one or the other class is independent. The Ovampo, as I have mentioned, looked down with much contempt on the Damaras; and there is not a single instance, so far as I could learn, of any Ovampo woman marrying a Damara, and settling in Damaraland, but the reverse is a very common case. The Bushmen appear to be naturalised among the negro tribes, and free in the border-lands between them to a distance very far north of Ondonga”555.

Rautanen, in his description of the Ondonga, states that there are neither serfs nor slaves. But at the same time he repeatedly makes mention of slaves. Slaves have no rights of inheritance. The master is responsible for damages caused by his slaves. Nobody but the chief has the right to sell slaves556. These contradictory statements do not allow us to arrive at a definite conclusion.

The Ovaherero or Damaras, according to Andersson, have slaves. The men are lazy; all their work is done by women and slaves. The slaves are the offspring of impoverished families, and captured Bushmen. The former are enslaved when children and mainly employed as herdsmen557. It is strange that Fritsch, who often refers to Andersson, makes no mention whatever of slavery. Hahn and Haarhoff also have nothing on slavery558, which is very puzzling, as according to Andersson slavery holds so large a place in their social life. Perhaps the children of impoverished families whom Andersson speaks of [145]are not slaves but free labourers compelled to serve only by poverty; for “among all South-African natives the rich oppress the poor, who in the hope of filling their stomachs, submit to a state of dependence that is not authorized by law559”.

Viehe remarks, that slavery in the proper sense does not exist among the Ovaherero. But captive children are reared among them and regarded as making part of the low domestics, so to speak as serfs. These serfs are, most of them, Damaras of the mountains. They do the same kind of work as the Ovaherero. Many of them, when full-grown, acquire wealth and are on a footing of equality with the Ovaherero themselves. “The serfs live entirely without supervision and can at any time return to their free compatriots.” The serfs, as well as the servants of Ovaherero origin, are designated by a native name, originally meaning foreigner, but that has become to mean servant. In another place our informant states, that every individual is called a servant, when compared with a person of higher standing560.

It is not easy to decide, whether this description is indicative of real slavery. Only some of the captives, when full-grown, arrive at a position equal to that of the free people; so it would seem that the others remain slaves. But if they are allowed at any time to return to their own country, their position is a voluntary one.

Kohler’s authorities, viz. the German magistrate Bensen and the missionaries Meyer and Büttner, all affirm that the Ovaherero keep slaves and give several details. Slaves are captives or children of such; but slavery can also take its origin in voluntary submission. Most of the slaves are Damaras of the mountains. All the goods of the slave belong to his master. The master is responsible for any crime committed by the slave and has the right of life and death over him. Slaves are bought and sold and inherited. They cannot be manumitted. Children of slaves are slaves561.

From this it would appear that slavery really exists.

The seeming contradiction between Viehe and Kohler’s authorities [146]might be solved, if we attend to the following remark, made by Kohler on Büttner’s authority: “The practical possibility for the slaves of escaping from their master is the best warrant for good treatment562.” We may infer from this that, when Viehe says that the slaves can at any time return to their own country, it is only meant that it is easy from them to do so (as among a pastoral and nomadic nation it is likely to be), not that they are permitted to do so by law or custom.

The conclusion is that the Ovaherero keep slaves.

Among the Batoka the slave-trade had in Livingstone’s time been lately introduced563. We are not told whether they kept slaves themselves.

The Barotse have slaves; this is proved by the statements of several writers564.

In the descriptions of the Makalaka no mention is made of slavery, so they probably have no slaves565.

The Manansa are not fond of fighting566, so they probably make no prisoners. They might have purchased slaves; but as nothing is told us of slavery amongst them, the probability is against this.

The Kimbunda have an elaborate slave-system, minutely described by Magyar567.

The Lovalé people have the reputation of being harsh task-masters. Slaves are procured by exchange from abroad568. These short notes are all the evidence we know of, bearing on the existence of slavery among them.

The people of Lunda are great slave-traders. Several details given by our informants prove that they also keep slaves for their own use569.

In the neighbouring country of Cazembe there are two social classes: the nobility and the Muzias or servants, including peasants, artisans, etc. Both classes are called slaves of the Muata (king); this of course is not slavery proper. All men able to fight must go to war; but this does not affect the [147]cultivation of the land, which is carried on by the women only570. These statements make the existence of slavery improbable.

Among the Kioko slavery certainly exists571.

The Selles, according to Magyar, have also slaves572.

Macdonald remarks that the East-Central African tribes in general have slaves573.

The Manganja suffer much from slave-stealing tribes, but also keep slaves themselves574.

Slavery also exists among the following tribes:

• Banyai575,
• Wagogo576,
• Washambala577,
• Wapare578,
• Wajao579,
• Makonde580,
• Wahehe581,
• Wachagga582
• Wanyamwesi583,
• Azimba584,
• Wajiji585,
• Wapokomo586,
• Bondei587.

Among the Wasiba or Basiba slavery is practised, though not to a great extent. “There are few slaves in the country, [148]most of them being women; a male slave generally runs away and joins another chief as a free man588.”

The Wanyakyusa, according to Fülleborn, do not keep slaves589.

Slavery is equally unknown among the Wambugu590.

The Wazaramo have no weapons of war; warfare seems unknown among them. They formerly suffered much from the slave-trade591. We do not know, whether they have slaves; probably they have not.

Peters, in his account of the Maravis, gives some particulars about slaves; but they are not sufficient to decide, whether there is domestic slavery or slave-trade only592.

The Wasinja and Wakerewe export slaves; but slaves are also imported into their country by caravans593. Probably the latter are kept among them; but this short note is not sufficient to draw a positive inference from.

The Wafipa are said never to make slaves or to sell them to traders. When a slave succeeds in arriving at the town of Kapufi, he is considered free. They never make war, though they defend themselves when attacked594.

Among the Wanyaturu slavery is unknown595.

Von Höhnel, visiting the country of the Wakikuyu, found two men, who some years before had joined a caravan and had been left behind because they were ill; from that time they had lived as slaves among the Wakikuyu596. This statement shows, that the Wakikuyu keep slaves for their own use, not for export only.

Of the Wawira we have a detailed description by Emin Pasha. As there is not a word about slaves in it, it is almost certain that slavery does not exist among them597.

Slavery is also very probably not to be found among the Wataveta, minutely described by Thomson, Johnston and Von Höhnel598. [149]

Ward and De Bas, speaking of the Congo tribes in general, state that slavery exists599.

On the Lower Congo, according to Phillips, the family consists of “the head man or patriarch, his wives, family proper, dependents and slaves.” There are also debtor-slaves600.

Slavery certainly exists among the following tribes:

• Bihés601,
• Minungo602,
• Mpongwe603,
• Orungu604,
• Mbengas605,
• Apinchi606,
• Duallas607,
• Fiotes608,
• Bayanzi609,
• Bangala on the Congo610,
• Baluba611,
• Manyuema612,
• Kabinda613,
• Ininga and Galloa614,
• Wangata615,
• Bondo616,
• Camas617,
• Bakundu,
• Banyang,
• Batom, [150]
• Mabum618,
• Bali tribes619,
• Bambala620,
• Bayaka621,
• Bahuana622,
• Bakwese623,
• Yaunde624,

Hoesemann gives several particulars about the slave system of some tribes of Cameroon, the principal of which are the Indikki625.

Regarding the Bakwiri, who are related to the Duallas, we are told that, unlike their neighbours, they do not keep slaves. On the death of a king a slave is bought from abroad and killed626.

The describers of the Mundombe make no mention of slavery; so they probably have no slaves627.

The writers on the Quillengue also are silent on this subject; but here the descriptions are not minute enough for us to arrive at any accurate conclusion628.

The natives of Angola have slaves; whether for export only or also for their own use, does not appear629.

The same applies to the Bangala on the Kuango, who are great slave-traders630.

The Songo or Masongo use slaves as articles of exchange, and wherever the chief goes, he is accompanied by slaves; but whether they can rightly be called a slave-keeping people, is not clear from Pogge’s short notes631.

Several authors inform us that the Fans have no slaves632.

In a monography on the Banaka and Bapuku many particulars [151]are given about their slave system633. Hence we infer that slavery exists among them, though Winwood Reade’s short remark that among the Bapuka the men are equal would seem to point to a contrary conclusion634.

Buchholz, in a short note, speaks of slavery among the Bakele635.

The slave-trade is almost the only trade of the Okota. On the death of a distinguished person slaves are killed636. This information is not, however, sufficient to put this case down as a clear one.

None of our informants on the Bateke make any mention of slavery. According to Guiral they sometimes eat their prisoners, when they find no occasion to sell them637. So they probably keep no slaves.

The Wagenia are stated to throw the corpses of slaves, and perhaps of all the dead, into the river638. This short note being the only evidence, we are not certain that slavery really exists.

Among the Warua at the funeral of a chief slaves are killed639. But this does not prove that slavery is a social institution here.

The Bakuba have slaves, according to Wissmann640. But the same author states in another place, that male slaves are bought only to be killed at funerals641. So slavery proper probably does not exist.

When Wissmann visited the Tuchilangue, they had no male slaves; but on a later visit he found that male slaves had been introduced among them. Pogge also observed male slaves642. So at present slavery exists here.

Of the Tupende we are told, that slaves have for two hundred years been exported from their country. They buy female slaves, and make them their wives643. Probably they keep no male slaves; but it is not certain. [152]

The Aduma and Oschebo are slave-traders; but of domestic slavery no mention is made644.

The same applies to the Hollo645 and Milembue646.