CHAPTER III.

[Contents]CHAPTER III.PASTORAL TRIBES.[Contents]§ 1.Capital and labour among pastoral tribes.The number of these tribes is not large, as they are found in a few parts of the world only. Moreover, the descriptions available to us were in many cases too incomplete to justify any inference as to their having or not having slaves.The clear cases noticed by us are the following.Positive cases.Arabia:Aeneze Bedouins,Larbas.2Caucasus:Circassians,Kabards.2Bantu tribes:Ovaherero,Bahima.2Hamitic group:Beduan,Beni Amer,Somal,Danakil.410Negative cases.India:Todas.1Central Asia:Kazak Kirghiz,Altaians,Turkomans.3Siberia:Samoyedes,Tunguz,Yakuts,nomadic Koryakes.4[263]Bantu tribes:Ama-Xosa,Ama-Zulu,some divisions of the Mundombe.3Hamatic group:Massai.112We see that there are almost as many positive as negative cases. So those theorists are wrong, who hold that the taming of animals naturally leads to the taming of men1.It might, however, be that the non-existence of slavery in our negative cases were due to a special, external cause, viz. that these tribes were so inclosed between more powerful nations as not to be able to procure slaves, though slaves would be of much use to them. A brief survey of the political state of these tribes shows that they are not all in this position. The Kazak Kirghiz, in Levchine’s time, kidnapped slaves whom they sold abroad. The Massai are very warlike and adopt captives. The Turkomans are “the intermediate agents for carrying on the slave-trade”2. The Ama-Xosa and Ama-Zulu are also very warlike3. We see that there are some pastoral tribes that, though able to procure slaves, do not keep any. The non-existence of slavery among them must be due to other, more internal, causes.It might also be that our positive cases were exceptions to a general rule. For many pastoral tribes, though subsisting mainly by cattle-breeding, carry on agriculture besides. If these only kept slaves, and employed them chiefly in work connected with agriculture, slavery would prove foreign to pastoral nomadism as such; for then these tribes would only keep slaves in their quality as agriculturists.We shall inquire whether this be so; and for this purpose we shall give a survey of the work imposed upon slaves among pastoral tribes. This survey, besides enabling us to decide upon the question at issue, will show what place slavery occupies in pastoral life.Among the Larbas the boys (also free boys) guard the cattle[264]on the pasture-ground, whereas the work that requires more skill (the tending of young animals, the breaking of horses, etc.) is equally divided between master and slaves4.Circassian slaves, according to Bell, till the soil, tend the cattle and perform domestic labour. Klaproth, however, states that the peasants may only be sold together with the land; so they are rather a kind of serfs. Domestic slaves may be sold separately5.According to Roscoe, among the Bahima, “the women’s duties are to wash the milk pots, perhaps it would be better to say see the pots are washed, because the work generally falls upon the slaves to perform”6.Munzinger speaks of domestic labour being imposed on slaves by the Beduan. Most of these slaves are women7.Among the Beni Amer it is considered an honour to have many slaves. “Properly speaking slaves serve their master only when children. Adult female slaves are concubines, live with their master, but are exempt from nearly all labour; adult male slaves generally despise all work, and belong to the retinue of the master. The master derives no real profit from his slaves.” According to Von Müller the fabrication of tar falls to the share of the slave, such work being below the dignity of a freeman8.Paulitschke tells us that among the nomadic Somal and Danakil slavery is not profitable; for the territories inhabited by them are thinly peopled, agriculture is insignificant, and these cattle-breeders get their subsistence rather easily; moreover they would be unable to support a considerable number of slaves by the produce of their cattle. Therefore among the Danakil on the river Aussa and the Rahanwîn Somal on the lower Wêbi-Schabêli, where slaves are employed in agriculture, there is more use for slave labour. Among the nomadic Somal and Danakil slaves appear also to be employed in warfare. According to Bottego, whose account applies to the Somal of the towns, adult male slaves till the soil, build houses, and perform the rudest and most fatiguing kinds of work. The[265]boys lead the cattle to the pasture-ground; the women are employed in household work and often are concubines of their masters9.There are some tribes that subsist mainly on agriculture, but also, to a great extent, on cattle-breeding. It may be of some use to give a survey of the work done by slaves, among them too; it will appear, then, whether they keep their slaves for agricultural purposes only, or employ them also for pastoral work.Among the Kafirs some slaves are blacksmiths. In war a slave boy beats the drum10. Our informant speaks only incidentally of slave labour; he does not mean to say that this is the only work performed by slaves.Among the Barotse young slaves are given as pages to the children of freemen. Slaves till the soil and tend the cattle; slave boys are employed as herdsmen11.In a description of the Waganda it is said: “One of the principal evils resulting from slavery in Uganda is that it causes all manual labour to be looked upon as derogatory to the dignity of a free man”12.Among the Mandingoes native-born slaves enjoy much liberty; they tend the cattle, and go to war, even without their masters. Freemen work as much as slaves. Every Mandingo, to whatever class he belongs, is occupied in agriculture. The tending of horses is incumbent on slave boys13.Hildebrandt states that the occupations of the Sakalavas are not many. In North Sakalavaland, however, rice is cultivated for export, and so there is more labour wanted here; therefore in this district slavery prevails to a large extent14.Among the Bogos there are hardly 200 slaves (whereas Munzinger estimates the total population at 8400). Slaves are of little use to their owners. Male slaves live separately and generally take to robbery. Female slaves, having no opportunity to marry, become prostitutes and live rather independently15.[266]The Takue have very few slaves. In their laws and customs they show a close resemblance to the Bogos16.Among the pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu agriculture is incumbent on slaves. The slaves also share in their masters’ slave-raids. Jansen gives some more details about the work of slaves in the Sulu Islands. The ordinary occupations of slaves are agriculture, fishing, manufacture of salt, trade, and domestic work17.The slaves of the Geges and Nagos of Porto Novo are chiefly employed in agriculture18.Among the Ossetes the slaves perform household work; the peasants are serfs19.The slaves captured and purchased by the Gallas are generally sold to foreign traders; in large households they are sometimes retained and employed in various kinds of work. In another place our informant states that most slaves are employed in agriculture20.Yoruba slaves are employed in trade and warfare21.We see that slaves are employed in agriculture among the agricultural Somal and Danakil, Fulbe, Barotse, Mandingoes, Sakalavas, pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu, Geges and Nagos, Gallas; and very probably also among the Waganda, where they perform “all manual labour.” As the details given by our ethnographers are not always complete, it is possible that in some more cases slaves are employed in agriculture. But it is sufficiently clear, that among the Beni Amer, nomadic Somal and Danakil, Bogos, and probably also among the Beduan and Takue, slaves do not till the soil. Among the Ossetes and Circassians the peasants are serfs, slaves being employed in household work. What work is incumbent on slaves among the Aeneze Bedouins we are not told; but agriculture seems to be unknown among them. Among the Larbas the daily work is equally divided between master and slaves, agriculture holding a very subordinate place. Hence it appears that several of these tribes keep slaves, though they do not[267]employ them in agriculture; pastoral tribes, as such, sometimes keep slaves.But another inference we can draw from the foregoing survey of slave labour is this. Where slaves are not employed in agriculture or in such other work as requires a settled life (e.g.house-building among the Somal of the towns, fishing and manufacture of salt among the pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu), the use of slave labour is not great. Among the Beni Amer, Bogos, and nomadic Somal and Danakil slave-keeping is stated to be a mere luxury. The Sakalavas, except in the rice-exporting district, do not want much slave labour. And only in one case, viz. among the Larbas, is it clearly stated that the chief business of slaves is pastoral work.This tends to prove, thatamong true pastoral tribes slavery, as a system of labour, is of little moment. This inference is verified by several statements about slaves being often manumitted or in the course of time becoming practically free.Burckhardt, speaking of the slaves of the Aeneze Bedouins, says: “After a certain lapse of time they are always emancipated, and married to persons of their own colour”22.Among the Circassians slaves are often manumitted. A slave can also purchase his freedom, and then becomes a member of a Circassian fraternity23.The Beni Amer have two kinds of slaves, newly-purchased and native-born. “Their condition differs so much, that only the former may properly be called slaves; the latter are rather serfs. The newly-purchased slave is treated like every Mohammedan slave, he may be sold and does not yet belong to the family. The native-born slave has only the name, not the state of a slave; this appears from his being allowed to intermarry with the Woreza (subjected class). The children born of such a marriage are considered free, as they descend from a free mother. In Barka the Kishendoa,i.e.native-born slaves, who inhabit a camp of tents of their own, are governed by a chief who is one of their own number, and intermarry with the Woreza. Native-born slaves may live where they like and have the same right of inheritance as freemen; only if such[268]a slave leaves no relatives does the master succeed to his goods.… In the blood-feud too the native-born slave is in a peculiar condition. If a newly-purchased slave is killed, his price is restored to his owner; for such a slave is looked upon as an article of trade. The native-born slave, however, belongs to the family; therefore his blood requires blood; he is avenged by his relatives if there are such, and otherwise by his master; if this is not practicable because the murderer is a man of power, the matter is hushed up; but a compensation is never given”24.The Somal often buy slaves whom they manumit soon afterwards25.Among the Kafirs of India each tribe is governed by a council. Even slaves can be elected as members of this council26.Our survey of the work done by slaves shows in the third place, that slaves are often employed in warfare. This will be accounted for later on.Here we have only to emphasize the fact, that to pastoral tribes as such slave labour is of little use. This makes it easy to understand why so many of them dispense with slavery altogether.Going on to inquire what is the cause of this phenomenon, we may remember the general conclusion we have arrived at in the last paragraph, viz. that slave labour is of little use, where subsistence is either dependent on capital, or very difficult to procure. Now it is easy to see that among pastoral tribes subsistence entirely depends on capital. Among people who live upon the produce of their cattle, a man who owns no cattle,i.e.no capital, has no means of subsistence. Accordingly, among pastoral tribes we find rich and poor men; and the poor often offer themselves as labourers to the rich27.Among the Syrian Bedouins “to every tent, or to every two or three tents, there is a shepherd or person to attend the cattle, either a younger son or servant; he receives wages for ten months”28.[269]Among the Larbas alms are given to the poor. The social rank of the head of a family depends on the number of his children, his practical knowledge of the pastoral art, and his wealth. There are free labourers who are paid in kind. Herdsmen have the usufruct of a part of the herds they tend. Generally the labourer takes a tenth in kind at the close of the time agreed upon; moreover he receives his daily food during the time of his engagement29.Levchine, speaking of the Kazak Kirghiz, tells us: “Once I asked a Kirghiz, owner of 8000 horses, why he did not sell every year a part of his stud. He answered: “Why should I sell that which is my pleasure? I want no money; if I had any, I should be obliged to shut it up in a box, where nobody would see it; but when my steeds run over the steppe everybody looks at them; everybody knows that they are mine; and people always remember that I am rich.” In this manner is the reputation of being a rich man acquired throughout the hordes; such is the wealth that procures them the regard of their countrymen and the title ofbaï(rich man), which sometimes gives them an ascendency over the offspring of the khans and the most deserving old men.” On the other hand the number of beggars is very considerable. Levchine makes no mention of servants; but Radloff, who about thirty years later visited the Kazak Kirghiz, says: “There exists here a class of servants, whom I found in every well-to-do family. The herds are generally tended by hired herdsmen, who are subjected to a kind of supervision.” The rich also engage poor families to till their lands. A man who loses all his cattle has no resource left but to offer himself as a labourer30.The same first-rate ethnographer informs us that among the Altaians “rich and poor eat the same kind of food; the difference is only in the size of the kettle and the quantity of food. The poor man eats what he has got, which most frequently is very little; and he would starve but that the rich have such an abundance of food, that in summer they readily entertain whoever comes to theirjurts(tents).” When a beast[270]is being killed, the poor neighbours in large numbers throng towards the place and try to secure those portions of the bowels that the rich disdain; they have to fight for them with the dogs, who are equally fond of the delicacies. When all guests have been served, pieces of meat are thrown towards the door, where poor men and dogs try to secure them. The picked bones are also thrown to the poor, who clean them so thoroughly that nothing but the bare bone is left to the dogs. The cattle of the rich are generally tended by poor neighbours, who live in the vicinity of the rich, partake of their food, and receive their worn clothes. Young girls often seek employment as servants; orphans of poor men also serve the rich31.Among the Kalmucks there are poor people who serve the rich as herdsmen32.Prschewalsky states that rich Mongols, who own thousands of beasts, employ herdsmen who are poor and have no relations33.The Kurds of Eriwan employ freemen as herdsmen34.Among the Tunguz the poor generally serve the rich, by whom they are badly treated35.Yakuts, who have less than one head of cattle per soul, must hire themselves out for wages36.Pallas says: “Every Samoyede has his reindeer and tends them himself with the help of his family, except the very rich who employ poor men as herdsmen.” Von Stenin also states that the poor serve the rich. The following anecdote, given by this writer, shows how strongly the desire of wealth influences psychical life among the Samoyedes. One of them depicted the delight of intoxication in these terms: “Spirits taste better than meat. When a man is drunk, he fancies he has many reindeer and thinks himself a merchant. But on coming to his senses he sees that he is poor and has just spent his last reindeer in drinking”37.Of the Koryakes we are told: “Before they were subjected[271]by the Russians, they had neither government nor magistrates; only the rich exercised some authority over the poor.” Their greatest pleasure consists in looking at their herds. The poor are employed in tending the herds of the rich for food and clothing; if they have themselves some reindeer, they are allowed to join them to their master’s herds and tend them together with the latter38.Among the Tuski, according to Georgi, the poor serve the rich as herdsmen39.In North-East Africa the state of things is not quite the same. The pastoral nomads here form the nobility, and tax subjected tribes with tributes and compulsory labour. Servants are not found here so often as in Asia. Sometimes, however, they are found. Thus among the Beni Amer there are herdsmen, maid-servants etc. who work for wages40. The same, perhaps, applies to the Massai, where the man who owns large herds and many wives, enjoys high consideration but a poor man is despised41.“Among all South African natives” says Fritsch “the rich tyrannize over the poor who, in the hope of filling their stomachs, comply with a state of dependence that is not authorized by law”42.Among the Caffres poor men place themselves under the protection of a rich head of a family, build their huts in his kraal, and in reward yield their cattle to him43.Kropf tells us that among the Ama-Xosa the consideration a man enjoys depends on the number of cattle he owns. The poor are fed by the chief and in return render him services44.The Ovaherero despise any one who has no cattle. The rich support many people, who become their dependents, and so they acquire distinction and power45. The children of impoverished families who, according to Andersson46, are kept as slaves, are perhaps rather to be called servants.Among those tribes which are mainly agricultural, but besides[272]subsist largely upon the produce of their cattle, similar phenomena present themselves.Among the Ossetes freemen are often employed as servants47.Among the Bechuanas the possession of cattle and a waggon is a mark of distinction. They mix their porridge with curdled milk, and therefore call a poor man a water-porridge man48.Casalis gives an elaborate description of the value which the Basutos attach to the possession of cattle. Wealth, among them, consists in cattle, and this wealth is the base of the power of the chiefs. By means of the produce of their herds they feed the poor, procure arms for the warriors, support the troops in war and entertain good relations with neighbouring nations. Were a chief to lose his cattle, his power would be at an end49.The Barotse employ as herdsmen young slaves and sons of poor men50.Among the Dinka every man upon an average owns three head of cattle; but there are also poor men, who are the slaves or servants of the rich51. We may safely infer that these “slaves or servants” are servants and not slaves.The sheikh of each Chillook tribe, according to Chaillé Long, detains as slaves those who do not own even a single cow52. Probably the same state of things prevails here as among the Caffres: these poor men are not slaves, but compelled by hunger to seek the protection of a rich man.In the country of the Gallas the value of labour is very small53.The Bogos employ freemen as herdsmen and peasants; they also keep maid-servants54.Among the Amahlubi there are herdsmen, who serve for wages55.We see that, wherever men subsist by cattle-breeding, a peculiar characteristic of economic life presents itself. This characteristic is not the existence of wealth; for wealth also exists among the tribes of the Pacific Coast of North America; yet on the Pacific Coast slave labour is of great use. It is the[273]existence of poverty. On the Pacific Coast the “abundant natural supplies in ocean, stream, and forest” enable each man, be he rich or not, to provide for himself; but among pastoral tribes the means of subsistence are the property of individuals; and those who own no cattle have no resource but to apply to the owners for support56. Therefore, if labourers are wanted, there are always freemen who readily offer their services; and there is no great use for slave labour57.So there is always a supply of labour. On the other hand, the demand for labour is small. There is but little work to be done. Among some pastoral tribes the men spend a great deal of time in idleness58.Prschewalsky, speaking of the Mongols, remarks: “Unlimited laziness is a main characteristic of the nomads; they spend their whole life in idleness, which is furthered by the character of pastoral nomadism. The tending of the cattle is the sole occupation of the Mongol, and this does not nearly require all his time. The guarding of cows and sheep is the business of the women and grown-up children; milking, creaming, butter-making and other domestic labour falls almost entirely to the share of the mistress of the house. The men generally do nothing, and from morning till night ride from onejurt(tent) to another, drinkingkoumissand chattering with their neighbours. The chase, which the nomads are passionately fond of, serves mainly as a pastime.”The Altaians have to survey the cattle; this consists only in riding a few times a day to the herds, and driving them together. The milking of the mares during the summer, which requires some courage, is also the men’s business.Among the Aeneze Bedouins the men’s sole business is feeding the horses, and in the evening milking the camels59.[274]The Kazak Kirghiz, too, are very lazy. They pass a great part of the summer sleeping because of the warmth; and in winter-time they hardly ever leave their tents, because the snow covers the roads. As they are not acquainted with any arts, and the tending of the cattle is their only occupation, there is no need for much work60.Rowney tells us of the Mairs and Meenas of Rajpootana: “The ostensible occupation followed by them was that of goatherds; but the herds were usually left to the charge of their boys and old men, while the more able-bodied spent their time, mounted on their ponies, in marauding, plundering, and murdering”61.Among the Massai the men despise every kind of work. Only warfare is considered an occupation worthy of a man62.It has to be remarked that most of these tribes do not keep slaves; so it is not by imposing all the work upon slaves that the men are enabled to pass their time in idleness; yet they do almost nothing. “The herdsman is lazy,” says Schmoller63, and Schurtz speaks of the aversion from all hard and regular work, which characterizes the pastoral nomads64. This proves that but little labour is wanted. One might object, that perhaps women and boys are overworked. But the fact that the able-bodied men, who form a considerable part of the community, can afford to take life so very easily, sufficiently proves that the total amount of labour required is rather small.Here we find one more reason why pastoral tribes have little use for slave labour. The demand for labour is small; therefore, even if free labourers were not available, only a few slaves would be wanted. Capital is here the principal factor of production, labour holding a subordinate place. Among agricultural tribes, when there is a practically unlimited supply of fertile soil, every person whose labour is available to the tribe can cultivate a piece of ground, and so, the more people there are, the more food can be produced. But among pastoral tribes, as soon as there are people enough within the tribe to guard the cattle, milk the cows, and do the other[275]work required, an increase in the number of labourers is not profitable. There is only a limited demand for labour; therefore, though there may be a temporary scarcity of labour which makes strengthening of the labour forces of the tribe by means of slaves desirable,—when a few slaves have been procured, the point at which a further increase in the number of people gives no profit will soon be reached again.We see that among pastoral tribes little labour is required; and such as is, is easy to procure; for there are always people destitute of capital, who offer themselves as labourers. Therefore slaves are economically of little use.There is, however, one description of a pastoral tribe, in which it is stated, that men as well as women have to work very hard. This is Geoffroy’s capital monography on the Larbas. The head of the family and his sons have to guard the herds, trace and dig pits, share in all operations common to the horsemen of the tribe: raids and battles, the pursuing of thieves, the defense of the pecuniary interests of the family, the depositing of merchandise in theksours(store-houses). The head of the family tends the sick animals, and has the administration of the wool and grain; but practically he will not have much to do with these matters, not considering them worth his attention. But a great part of his time is taken up with keeping watch and marching, and this makes his life a rather hard one. He does not sleep at night; he waters the cattle in the pits orr’dirs; he surrounds his tents with a protecting hedge, thezirba; he struggles against the elements, which often disperse beasts, tents and men. Daily, from the cradle to the tomb, the nomad’s life is a struggle for existence. As a child he already has to look after the cattle; he learns to ride on horseback with his father. When older, whether rich or poor, he has to learn, for several years, to conduct large numbers of cattle, which is a very difficult and dangerous work, to tend the different kinds of animals, to cure them, to sell them, to derive from them as much profit as possible. Pastoral art is more complicated than at first sight it seems, and comprehends a long series of accomplishments. At twenty years the nomad is an accomplished man, thoroughly acquainted with the life he has to lead, enjoying all the physical[276]strength indispensable in the exceptionalmilieuwhere he has to struggle. The two youngest sons of the head of the family our informant describes, 15 and 13 years of age, now perform in the family the duties of herdsmen. Daily occupations of master and slaves are the driving together of the dispersed animals, the tending of the females that have calved, the preparing of special food for the young animals, the dressing of the stronger ones for the saddle and pack-saddle, and the chase of hares and gazelles65.We see that pastoral life is not so easy here as on the fertile plains of Central Asia. But the work that is most necessary here, and also most difficult, is the care for the security of the tribe and its possessions, or, as Geoffroy very appropriately expresses it, “c’est un peu toujours comme la guerre”. And this work cannot be left to slaves; else the slaves would become the masters of the tribe. Warriors are wanted here; labourers not so much.We have now accounted for the non-existence of slavery among many pastoral tribes, and the little use of slave labour among pastoral tribes in general, by the principle laid down in the last paragraph, that, generally speaking, slaves are not wanted where subsistence depends upon capital.In North-East Africa, however, there is one more cause at work, making slavery superfluous. This is the existence of a kind ofsubstitute for slavery, viz.subjection of tribes as such. Pastoral tribes often levy tributes on agricultural tribes, to which they are superior in military strength; the latter cannot easily leave the lands they cultivate and seek a new country; if not too heavily oppressed, they will prefer paying a tribute. And to pastoral nomads the levying of a tax on agricultural tribes brings far more profit than the enslaving of individuals belonging to such tribes, whom they would have to employ either in pastoral labour, which they do not want, or in tilling the soil, which work the nomads would be unable to supervise. There are also pastoral tribes subjected by other pastoral nomads, the latter forming the nobility and the military part of society. Finally we find subjected tribes of hunters, smiths,[277]etc.; here we have sometimes rather to deal with a voluntary division of labour66.The Somal have several pariah castes. Among the Wer-Singellis in North Somaliland we find the following: 1º. Midgân, smiths and traders; these, by acquiring considerable wealth, sometimes win so much regard, that even a Somali noble deigns to marry his daughter to a Midgân. 2º. Tómal, who are employed by Somali nobles as servants, herdsmen and camel-drivers, and are also obliged to go to war. The noble Wer-Singelli carries sword and spear, whereas the Tomali uses bow and arrows; sometimes a Midgân girl is given him as a wife, but never the daughter of a noble Somali. The Tómal, however, belong to the tribe. 3º. Jibbir, who are very much despised. They have no fixed habitations; they roam in families over the country, from tribe to tribe, as jugglers and magic doctors. Everybody, for fear of sorcery, gives them food and presents, and in return receives from them amulets, made of stone and roots. They contract no marriage outside their own caste67.The Massai, true warriors and raiders, “keep a subjected tribe, the Wa-rombutta, who do their hunting and what meagre agriculture they indulge in. This tribe is insignificant in appearance, and although servile and subject to the Massai are not slaves; they present almost the appearance of dwarfs.” The Wandorobo too, according to Thomson, are regarded by the Massai as a kind of serfs, and treated accordingly; and Johnston calls them a helot race of hunters and smiths68.Among the Bogos “patronage results from military subjection or from the helpless state of separate immigrants with regard to a strong and closely united nation. As the nobles carefully trace their pedigrees, it is easy to find out the Tigres. Tigre means a man of Ethiopian extraction, who speaks the Tigre language. Some Tigre families, subjected from time immemorial, have immigrated together with the family of Gebre Terke [the legendary ancestor of the Bogos]. Others already lived in[278]the country, and unable to withstand the invasion, hastened to submit in order to be tolerated. The Bogos seem to have taken possession of the country in a very pacific and forbearing way, and unlike the Normans and other European invaders, do not interfere with the regulation of landed property, so that the ancient aborigines still own most of the land. The third class is composed of foreign families who, being for some reason unable to agree with their countrymen, settle in the country of the Bogos and place themselves under their protection, which still continually occurs. A member of the Boas family [i.e.of the Bogos nobility], however poor and weak, never becomes a Tigre; his origin is a guarantee of his independence. A Tigre, however mighty and rich, cannot become a Schmagilly [noble]; for the Tigres, who are a compound of various elements, cannot trace their origin so far back as the Schmagillies who pretend to spring all from the same ancestor. Moreover, the oppression is so slight, that a revolution is unimaginable”69.Among the Takue the state of the Tigres is the same as among the Bogos; formerly they brought beer to their lords; now they pay them a small tribute of corn and fat70.Marea Tigres have a harder lot. Two kinds of obligations are incumbent on them: towards their respective masters, and towards the nobilityen bloc. Even the poorest noble never becomes a Tigre, and does not perform degrading work, such as for instance milking. The Tigre pays his master yearly 8 bottles of fat, a measure of corn, and every week a leathern bag with milk. Of every cow killed by a Tigre the master receives a considerable portion; a cow belonging to a Tigre, which dies a natural death, falls entirely to the master. As for the Tigres’ obligations towards the nobility as a whole, on several occasions they have to give up their cattle for the nobility. Among the Black Marea the Tigres own most of the land; among the Red Marea the greater part of the land is in the hands of impoverished nobles, who live chiefly upon the rent of their landed property. Another class are the Dokono, who are obliged to choose a patron and pay a tribute, but[279]are held in rather high esteem and often marry daughters of the nobles; they own land and herds and are much given to trading71.Among the Beni Amer the same distinction, of nobles and subjects, prevails. The latter are called Woréza. “We shall speak of master and servant,” says Munzinger “though the latter term does not quite answer the purpose. The state of things we are going to describe much resembles that which we have met with among the aristocrats of the Anseba; among the Beni Amer, however, the servant is a feoffee rather than a protégé. But as he derives his wealth from his master, to whom he owes what we may call interest, his state is one of much greater dependence.… Among the Beni Amer it is an ancient custom, that a lord distributes his wealth among his servants;e.g.if he receives 100 cows as his portion of the spoils of war, he does not add them to his herd, but leaves them to his servants as a present. When the servant marries, the lord presents him with a camel. In every emergency the servant applies to his lord, who helps him whenever possible. All these presents become the true property of the recipient; the servant may do with them as he likes, sell and even spend them; the lord may upbraid him for it, but legally has nothing to do with it. On the death of the servant the presents devolve upon his heirs. But the lord has a kind of usufruct of these presents; the servant provides him with fat and daily brings him a certain quantity of milk,i.e.he feeds the lord and his family. Often has the lord to wait for his supper till midnight, because the servant provides for himself first. The servant, moreover, has to provide the funeral sacrifice for his lord and for every member of the latter’s family; he leaves to the lord every sterile cow, and when he kills a beast he brings him the breast-piece. He stands by his lord in every emergency, and even assists him according to his means towards paying the tribute”. The servant is, so to speak, a tenant of his lord. As the Beni Amer are nomads, there is no land to distribute; the pasture has no owner; therefore the fief can only consist in movable property. As most of the wealth of the country is[280]in the hands of the servants, they have a decisive voice in every public council; they have to find out where the best pastures are, where the camp has to be erected72.Similar phenomena present themselves outside North-East Africa.In the second chapter of Part I we have met with subjected tribes in South Africa, such as Fengu, Makalahiri, etc., sometimes called slaves by our ethnographers73.Geoffroy speaks of settled tribes being in some way the vassals of the Larbas. Theksoursare buildings in which the nomads preserve their corn, dates and wool; these stores are guarded by settled tribes, that permanently live there and receive one tenth of the preserved stock yearly. The nomads look upon all settled tribes as degenerate beings and inferiors74. Here we have to deal with a voluntary division of labour, rather than with subjection.In Circassia, according to Bell, the serfs are prisoners of war and the ancient inhabitants of the country. The latter are perhaps the same peasants who, according to Klaproth, may not be sold apart from the land75.It is remarkable, that in Central Asia and Siberia we do not find a single instance of this subjection of tribes as such76. This is probably the reason why in these parts members of the tribe are so often employed as servants.Where nearly all work is left to subjected tribes or castes, and the nobles do nothing but fight, there is not much use for slave labour. The nobles do not want slaves, because all work required by them is performed by their subjects.We have now found a new cause, from which in some cases slaves are not wanted: the subjection of tribes as such, which serves as a substitute for slavery.[Contents]§ 2.Slavery among pastoral tribes.Yet several pastoral tribes keep slaves; this has still to be[281]accounted for. We shall inquire first, whether thesecondary causeswe have found in the last paragraph are at work here.1º.Condition of women.On the Pacific Coast of North America the men sometimes procure slaves, in order to relieve the women of a part of their task. There are some details on record suggestive of the same state of things among some pastoral tribes. Among the Circassians, Bahima and Beduan (pastoral tribes), Waganda, pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu, Ossetes and Gallas (agricultural tribes depending largely on cattle for their subsistence), slaves are employed for household work. The same is the case with female slaves among the Larbas and Somal of the towns. Munzinger states that only few Beduan are rich enough to keep a female slave or a maid-servant; therefore in most families the preparing of food falls to the share of the wife, this being almost her only occupation77. Hence we may infer that among the Beduan, and probably among some other tribes, slaves are procured by the men for the benefit of the women.2º.Preserving of food.This does not seem to require much labour among pastoral tribes. On the Pacific Coast of North America the fish have to be prepared for winter use. But where men live upon the products of their cattle, food is not at one time much more abundant than at another.3º.Trade and industry.Household work, sometimes performed by slaves, does not seem to serve the purposes of trade, as on the Pacific Coast; there is not a single detail on record, that would lead us to suppose that it does. We even find particulars tending to prove the contrary. Among the Beni Amer, who have many slaves, the women are continually occupied in making mats, the proceeds of which labour are often sufficient to pay the tribute to the Turks78. Slaves do not seem to join in this occupation.Among the Larbas free women manufacture tissues, which are sold abroad79. Probably slaves are not capable of performing such fine work.Among the Yorubas and pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu[282]the slaves are occupied in trading. But these tribes are not nomadic; moreover, these slaves do not, like the slaves on the Pacific Coast, prepare the articles of commerce, but are themselves the traders, which is quite another thing.4º.Slaves wanted as warriors.Slaves sometimes serve to augment the military strength of the community. From the survey of the work done by slaves, given in the beginning of this chapter, it appears that they are often employed in warfare, viz. among the nomadic Somal and Danakil, Kafirs, pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu, Mandingoes and Yorubas; probably also among the Bogos, where they generally take to robbery. Circassian slaves cannot be compelled to go to war80. Hence it seems to follow that they may go if they like. Among the Beni Amer native-born slaves are avenged by their own relatives; so these slaves are armed, and probably fight together with their masters.The ensuing statement strikingly shows how highly slaves are valued as warriors among the nomadic Somal and Danakil. If a slave kills one enemy, he becomes free; if two or more, he is entitled to being adopted. Having killed ten enemies, he becomes a person of rank and enjoys many privileges81.In these cases slaves strengthen the military force of the tribe. But the tribe profits only indirectly by this reinforcement of the family. Most pastoral nomads live in comparatively small groups, rather independently; there is no strong central government82. And where quarrels between these small groups are frequent, the more numerous the family (in the wider sense, the Romanfamilia, including slaves), the better will the head of the family be able to maintain his position83. And pastoral nomads have always a great motive for fighting: they can enrich themselves by a successful raid. Among hunting, fishing, and agricultural tribes, if the conqueror does not want to keep the vanquished as slaves, war gives little profit84. But[283]in the raids pastoral nomads make on each other, the successful raider may acquire numerous herds,i.e.great wealth. Therefore it is of the utmost importance for a man to have as numerous afamiliaas possible.When speaking of the Larbas, we have seen that their mode of life isun peu toujours comme la guerre. Their describer states: “Theft is the most threatening evil the nomad has to deal with; he is therefore most severe in suppressing it, the punishment being invariably death.” He also speaks of free servants, members of the family, who live under the protection and at the expense of some rich head of a family; they are generally very numerous, and form a body of clients that strengthens their patron’s power85.Levchine, speaking of the Kazak Kirghiz, says: “Their feuds are caused by the unrestrained desire for plunder, that ruins and entirely demoralizes them; this plundering is calledbaranta, Thesebarantasconsist in reciprocal cattle-stealing, from which often sanguinary combats result.… And we must not think that public hatred or contempt falls on those who are addicted to these horrible excesses; on the contrary, they enjoy a reputation for bravery, and are distinguished by the name ofBatyrorBoghatyr, which name spreads through all the hordes the fame of their exploits. Many of these braves, calledBatyrfor their plundering ardour, though many years dead, still live in the remembrance of their countrymen, and their names are celebrated.” Accordingly, one of the qualities required in a chief is a large family, that gives him the power to maintain his authority86.Among the Beni Amer, where it seems to be quite an ordinary thing for a noble to receive 100 cows as his portion of the spoils of war, it is a great support for a man to have many children, as in these countries family is opposed to family87.A writer of the 18thcentury tells us that “the Chukchi who live to the north of the river Anadir, are not subjected to the Russian empire, and often make raids on those brought under Russian control, on the Koryakes as well as on the Chukchi,[284]killing or making prisoners all they meet, and carrying off their herds of reindeer”88.Among the Somal and Gallas internal wars are very frequent; among the former most wars are marauding expeditions. And here too the possession of wife and children is indispensable; an unmarried man cannot attain to wealth and power89.Among the Ama-Xosa and Ovaherero the chief object of warfare is cattle-stealing. Fugitives from other tribes are never delivered up by the Ama-Xosa, whatever the reason of their flight; for they strengthen the chief’s power. Another fact, showing the great importance they attach to the numerical strength of their tribe, is this, that he who kills a man or womanbyaccident has to pay a fine to the chief, as a compensation for the loss sufferedbythe government of the tribe90.We have already seen that the Massai are “true warriors and raiders” and that the Mairs and Meenas spend their time in “marauding, plundering and murdering”91.We see that among these tribes everybody is desirous of having as many people about him as possible for the protection of his own property and the capturing of his neighbour’s. And a convenient means of procuring such people is the purchase of slaves.There is one more secondary cause here, which we have not met with before. It is sometimes stated that keeping slaves is a mereluxury. Now rich nomads, like all rich people, love luxury. Like the rich Kazak Kirghiz who told Levchine that the possession of over 8000 horses procured him a reputation among his countrymen, many rich nomads will win renown by possessing a large retinue of slaves. Thus for instance we know that among the Beni Amer slave labour is of little use; yet it is stated, that the Beni Amer are ambitious to possess many slaves92. And slaves are preferable, as objects of luxury, to free servants. For slaves, generally acquired from beyond the limits of the tribe, are much more apt to gratify the pride of the rich man by their submission, than poor freemen,[285]who are always conscious of theirmembershipof the tribe and unwilling to be trampled down. The latter fact is proved by several statements of ethnographers.If a rich Samoyede refuses to give his poor countryman a reindeer for food, the latter has the right to carry off one or more from the rich man’s herd; the law does not give the owner any hold upon him93.Among the Yakuts, according to Müller, the rich sustain their poor fellow-tribesmen; if the latter lose their reindeer, they are indemnified by the rich. Another writer tells us that the poor, when dying of hunger, refrain from slaughtering an animal, from fear of losing their independence94.Similarly among the Ostyaks “members of the same tribe, whether large or small, consider themselves as relations, even where the common ancestor is unknown, and where the evidence of consanguinity is wholly wanting. Nevertheless, the feeling of consanguinity, sometimes real, sometimes conventional, is the fundamental principle of the union. The rich, of which there are few, help the poor, who are many. There is not much that can change hands. The little, however, that is wanted by the needy is taken as a right rather than a favour”95.The Altaians are very sensitive about their liberty. “Every poor man who joins a rich family considers himself a member of it. He will perish of hunger, rather than comply with a demand of his rich neighbour made in a commanding tone”96.Licata tells us that hungry Danakil go to their chief and say: “I am hungry, give me something to eat”97.Among the Larbas free labourers “work for one more fortunate than themselves, but not for a superior; for notwithstanding the relation of employer and employed, equality prevails”98.It is easy to understand that slaves are preferred to such servants. Only in one case is this preference mentioned by an ethnographer. Munzinger states that the slaves bought by the rich Beduan for household work are generally more trusted[286]than ordinary servants, as they are riveted to their position99. But we may safely suppose that in other cases also this circumstance has furthered the growth of slavery.We have explained why pastoral tribes have no great use for slave labour. We have also mentioned some motives that may induce such tribes to keep slaves. But the fact has not yet been accounted for, that some pastoral tribes keep slaves and others do not. Whence this difference? It has been shown that slavery does not only exist among pastoral tribes that till the soil to a limited extent. Among all pastoral tribes subsistence is dependent on capital. Wealth, too, exists among all these tribes100; and we cannot see why slaves, as a luxury, would be wanted by one such tribe more than by another. As slaves are sometimes employed as warriors, we might be inclined to suppose that slavery exists among all warlike tribes, and among these only. But there are several pastoral tribes which, though very warlike, do not keep slaves: Kazak Kirghiz, Turkomans, Massai, and some pastoral nomads of South Africa.That the subjection of tribes as such in stead of individual slaves, of which we have spoken in the last paragraph, cannot account for all cases in which slavery does not exist, becomes evident, if we take into consideration that most of the pastoral tribes of North-East Africa, which keep other tribes in subjection, practise slavery, whereas in Central Asia and Siberia we find neither subjected tribes nor slaves.Therefore there must be other causes.In chapter II we have spoken ofexternal causes: it may be that slaves would be of great use, and yet cannot be kept, because the coercive power of the tribe is not strong enough. We have also seen that this coercive power is most strongly developed where men have fixed habitations, live in rather large groups and preserve food for the time of scarcity, and where there is a group of somewhat homogeneous tribes maintaining, constant relations with each other. Pastoral tribes are nomadic,[287]do not live together in very large groups, and do not want to preserve food, for they have their supply of food always at hand. Yet the fact that several pastoral tribes keep slaves proves that at least among these the coercive power is strong enough. We shall try to find a cause peculiar to these tribes, that enables them to keep slaves. Now it is remarkable that our positive cases are nearly all of them found in a few definite parts of the globe: North-East Africa, the Caucasus, and Arabia; whereas the pastoral nomads of Siberia, Central Asia, India, and South Africa, with one exception (the Ovaherero), do not keep slaves. And the parts where slavery exists are exactly those where the slave-trade has for a long time been carried on on a large scale. Accordingly, the slaves these tribes keep are often purchased from slave-traders and in several cases belong to inferior races.The slaves of the Aeneze Bedouins are Negroes101.The slaves kept by the Larbas are Negroes purchased from slave-trading caravans102.Although we find no description of slave-trade among the Circassians, slaves in the Caucasus are exported on a large scale103.Most slaves found among the Somal and Danakil are articles of transit trade: they are purchased from interior tribes and intended to be sold to Arabians. A Somali never becomes the slave of a Somali, and prisoners of war are not enslaved104.Many Beduan make it their business to steal slaves, whom they sell in Massowah105.The slaves kept by the Beni Amer are either captured from enemies or purchased abroad; a Beni Amer never loses his freedom. Slaves are not, however, often sold abroad106.On the other hand, the pastoral tribes of Central Asia and Siberia live in secluded parts, far from the centres of the slave-trade.The slave-trade greatly facilitates the keeping of slaves. Where slaves are brought by slave-dealers from remote parts, it is much easier to keep them than where they have to be[288]captured from enemies,i.e.from the neighbours; in the latter case the slaves are very likely to run away and return to their native country; but a purchased slave transported from a great distance cannot so easily return; if he succeeded in escaping, he would be instantly recaptured by one of the foreign tribes whose countries he would have to traverse. Moreover, some tribes may, by their intercourse with slave-traders, have become familiar with the idea of slavery, and so the slave-trade may have suggested to them the keeping of slaves for their own use.There is another circumstance, which may partially account for the existence of slavery among some of these tribes: the slaves are often Negroes. And Negroes have always and everywhere been enslaved; they seem to be more fit for slaves than most races of mankind. Galton, speaking of the Damaras, says: “These savages court slavery. You engage one of them as a servant, and you find that he considers himself your property, and that you are, in fact, become the owner of a slave. They have no independence about them, generally speaking, but follow a master as spaniels would. Their hero-worship is directed to people who have wit and strength enough to ill-use them. Revenge is a very transient passion in their character, it gives way to admiration of the oppressor. The Damaras seem to me to love nothing; the only strong feelings they possess, which are not utterly gross and sensual, are those of admiration and fear. They seem to be made for slavery, and naturally fall into its ways”107. And Hutter, describing the Bali tribes of Cameroon, remarks that the Negro wants to be ruled and patiently endures any amount of oppression108. Similar descriptions may undoubtedly be given of many other Negro tribes. Moreover several slave-keeping nomadic tribes are Semites and Hamites, and therefore look upon the Negroes as an inferior race. Now, where slaves are procured mainly for military purposes (and we have seen that this is often the case with pastoral tribes), an absorption of foreigners into the tribe would answer the purpose as well as, and perhaps better than, slavery. But where the foreigners belong to inferior races, the members of the tribe[289]are not likely to intermarry with them and look upon them as their equals; they remain slaves, though they are not of great use as such. We must also take into consideration that inferior races are not so much to be dreaded as superior peoples; the latter, if individuals belonging to them were kept as slaves, might retaliate upon the slave-owners. This may have been the reason why the Kazak Kirghiz who, in Levchine’s time, kidnapped many Russians, always sold them abroad: it would not have been safe to keep them as slaves. Accordingly, Pallas states that in his time they used to kidnap men on the Russian frontiers towards the time when they were going to remove with their herds, so that they could not be pursued109.In the second chapter of this Part we have remarked that the growth of slavery is furthered by the existence of a group of more or less similar tribes, the slave-trade being in such cases the means of spreading slavery over the group. We may say now that, whether such a group exists or not, the slave-trade facilitates the keeping of slaves. When the coercive power of a tribe is not strong enough for the keeping of prisoners as slaves, the slave-trade may enable such a tribe to keep slaves; for the keeping of purchased slaves, brought from a great distance, does not require so much coercive power.We see that the difference between the slave-keeping and the other pastoral tribes consists in external circumstances. Pastoral tribes have no strong motives for making slaves, for the use of slave labour is small. On the other hand, there are no causes absolutely preventing them from keeping slaves. These tribes are, so to speak, in a state of equilibrium; a small additional cause on either side turns the balance. One such additional cause is the slave-trade; another is the neighbourhood of inferior races. There may be other small additional causes, peculiar to single tribes. We shall not inquire whether there are, but content ourselves with the foregoing conclusions, of which the principal are these, that the taming of animals does not naturally lead to the taming of men, and that the relation between capital and labour among pastoral tribes renders the economic use of slavery very small.[290]Recapitulating, we may remark that our general theory, that there is no great use for slave labour where subsistence depends on capital, is fully verified by our investigation of economic life among pastoral tribes.Two secondary internal causes found in the second chapter have been also met with among pastoral tribes: slaves are sometimes employed in warfare, and sometimes for domestic labour to relieve the women of their task. Two new secondary factors have been found in this chapter: slaves are kept as a luxury; and sometimes the subjection of tribes as such, serving as a substitute for slavery, makes slavery proper superfluous.With regard to the external causes it has been shown that the coercive power of pastoral tribes is not very strong, as they are nomadic and live in rather small groups; but this want is sometimes compensated for by the slave-trade and the neighbourhood of inferior races. The two latter circumstances may therefore rank as new external causes, the slave-trade taking the place of the existence of a homogeneous group. On the Pacific Coast of N. America it is the trade between tribes of the same culture, among pastoral nomads it is the trade with Arabia, etc.; but in either case it is the slave-trade that furthers the growth of slavery.Recapitulation of the causes we have found up to the present.Furthering the growth of slavery.Hindering the growth of slavery.I. Internal causes.A.General.1º. Subsistence easily acquired and not dependent on capital.1º. Subsistence dependent on capital.2º. Subsistence not dependent on capital, but difficult to procure.[291]B.Secondary economic:1º. Preserving of food.1º. Female labour making slave labour superfluous.2º. Trade and industry.3º. A high position of women.2º. Subjection of tribes as such.C.Secondary non-economic:1º. Slaves wanted for military purposes.1º. Militarism making slavery impossible.2º. Slaves kept as a luxury.II. External causes:1º. Fixed habitations.2º. Living in large groups.3º. Preserving of food110.4º. The slave-trade.5º. The neighbourhood of inferior races.[292]

[Contents]CHAPTER III.PASTORAL TRIBES.[Contents]§ 1.Capital and labour among pastoral tribes.The number of these tribes is not large, as they are found in a few parts of the world only. Moreover, the descriptions available to us were in many cases too incomplete to justify any inference as to their having or not having slaves.The clear cases noticed by us are the following.Positive cases.Arabia:Aeneze Bedouins,Larbas.2Caucasus:Circassians,Kabards.2Bantu tribes:Ovaherero,Bahima.2Hamitic group:Beduan,Beni Amer,Somal,Danakil.410Negative cases.India:Todas.1Central Asia:Kazak Kirghiz,Altaians,Turkomans.3Siberia:Samoyedes,Tunguz,Yakuts,nomadic Koryakes.4[263]Bantu tribes:Ama-Xosa,Ama-Zulu,some divisions of the Mundombe.3Hamatic group:Massai.112We see that there are almost as many positive as negative cases. So those theorists are wrong, who hold that the taming of animals naturally leads to the taming of men1.It might, however, be that the non-existence of slavery in our negative cases were due to a special, external cause, viz. that these tribes were so inclosed between more powerful nations as not to be able to procure slaves, though slaves would be of much use to them. A brief survey of the political state of these tribes shows that they are not all in this position. The Kazak Kirghiz, in Levchine’s time, kidnapped slaves whom they sold abroad. The Massai are very warlike and adopt captives. The Turkomans are “the intermediate agents for carrying on the slave-trade”2. The Ama-Xosa and Ama-Zulu are also very warlike3. We see that there are some pastoral tribes that, though able to procure slaves, do not keep any. The non-existence of slavery among them must be due to other, more internal, causes.It might also be that our positive cases were exceptions to a general rule. For many pastoral tribes, though subsisting mainly by cattle-breeding, carry on agriculture besides. If these only kept slaves, and employed them chiefly in work connected with agriculture, slavery would prove foreign to pastoral nomadism as such; for then these tribes would only keep slaves in their quality as agriculturists.We shall inquire whether this be so; and for this purpose we shall give a survey of the work imposed upon slaves among pastoral tribes. This survey, besides enabling us to decide upon the question at issue, will show what place slavery occupies in pastoral life.Among the Larbas the boys (also free boys) guard the cattle[264]on the pasture-ground, whereas the work that requires more skill (the tending of young animals, the breaking of horses, etc.) is equally divided between master and slaves4.Circassian slaves, according to Bell, till the soil, tend the cattle and perform domestic labour. Klaproth, however, states that the peasants may only be sold together with the land; so they are rather a kind of serfs. Domestic slaves may be sold separately5.According to Roscoe, among the Bahima, “the women’s duties are to wash the milk pots, perhaps it would be better to say see the pots are washed, because the work generally falls upon the slaves to perform”6.Munzinger speaks of domestic labour being imposed on slaves by the Beduan. Most of these slaves are women7.Among the Beni Amer it is considered an honour to have many slaves. “Properly speaking slaves serve their master only when children. Adult female slaves are concubines, live with their master, but are exempt from nearly all labour; adult male slaves generally despise all work, and belong to the retinue of the master. The master derives no real profit from his slaves.” According to Von Müller the fabrication of tar falls to the share of the slave, such work being below the dignity of a freeman8.Paulitschke tells us that among the nomadic Somal and Danakil slavery is not profitable; for the territories inhabited by them are thinly peopled, agriculture is insignificant, and these cattle-breeders get their subsistence rather easily; moreover they would be unable to support a considerable number of slaves by the produce of their cattle. Therefore among the Danakil on the river Aussa and the Rahanwîn Somal on the lower Wêbi-Schabêli, where slaves are employed in agriculture, there is more use for slave labour. Among the nomadic Somal and Danakil slaves appear also to be employed in warfare. According to Bottego, whose account applies to the Somal of the towns, adult male slaves till the soil, build houses, and perform the rudest and most fatiguing kinds of work. The[265]boys lead the cattle to the pasture-ground; the women are employed in household work and often are concubines of their masters9.There are some tribes that subsist mainly on agriculture, but also, to a great extent, on cattle-breeding. It may be of some use to give a survey of the work done by slaves, among them too; it will appear, then, whether they keep their slaves for agricultural purposes only, or employ them also for pastoral work.Among the Kafirs some slaves are blacksmiths. In war a slave boy beats the drum10. Our informant speaks only incidentally of slave labour; he does not mean to say that this is the only work performed by slaves.Among the Barotse young slaves are given as pages to the children of freemen. Slaves till the soil and tend the cattle; slave boys are employed as herdsmen11.In a description of the Waganda it is said: “One of the principal evils resulting from slavery in Uganda is that it causes all manual labour to be looked upon as derogatory to the dignity of a free man”12.Among the Mandingoes native-born slaves enjoy much liberty; they tend the cattle, and go to war, even without their masters. Freemen work as much as slaves. Every Mandingo, to whatever class he belongs, is occupied in agriculture. The tending of horses is incumbent on slave boys13.Hildebrandt states that the occupations of the Sakalavas are not many. In North Sakalavaland, however, rice is cultivated for export, and so there is more labour wanted here; therefore in this district slavery prevails to a large extent14.Among the Bogos there are hardly 200 slaves (whereas Munzinger estimates the total population at 8400). Slaves are of little use to their owners. Male slaves live separately and generally take to robbery. Female slaves, having no opportunity to marry, become prostitutes and live rather independently15.[266]The Takue have very few slaves. In their laws and customs they show a close resemblance to the Bogos16.Among the pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu agriculture is incumbent on slaves. The slaves also share in their masters’ slave-raids. Jansen gives some more details about the work of slaves in the Sulu Islands. The ordinary occupations of slaves are agriculture, fishing, manufacture of salt, trade, and domestic work17.The slaves of the Geges and Nagos of Porto Novo are chiefly employed in agriculture18.Among the Ossetes the slaves perform household work; the peasants are serfs19.The slaves captured and purchased by the Gallas are generally sold to foreign traders; in large households they are sometimes retained and employed in various kinds of work. In another place our informant states that most slaves are employed in agriculture20.Yoruba slaves are employed in trade and warfare21.We see that slaves are employed in agriculture among the agricultural Somal and Danakil, Fulbe, Barotse, Mandingoes, Sakalavas, pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu, Geges and Nagos, Gallas; and very probably also among the Waganda, where they perform “all manual labour.” As the details given by our ethnographers are not always complete, it is possible that in some more cases slaves are employed in agriculture. But it is sufficiently clear, that among the Beni Amer, nomadic Somal and Danakil, Bogos, and probably also among the Beduan and Takue, slaves do not till the soil. Among the Ossetes and Circassians the peasants are serfs, slaves being employed in household work. What work is incumbent on slaves among the Aeneze Bedouins we are not told; but agriculture seems to be unknown among them. Among the Larbas the daily work is equally divided between master and slaves, agriculture holding a very subordinate place. Hence it appears that several of these tribes keep slaves, though they do not[267]employ them in agriculture; pastoral tribes, as such, sometimes keep slaves.But another inference we can draw from the foregoing survey of slave labour is this. Where slaves are not employed in agriculture or in such other work as requires a settled life (e.g.house-building among the Somal of the towns, fishing and manufacture of salt among the pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu), the use of slave labour is not great. Among the Beni Amer, Bogos, and nomadic Somal and Danakil slave-keeping is stated to be a mere luxury. The Sakalavas, except in the rice-exporting district, do not want much slave labour. And only in one case, viz. among the Larbas, is it clearly stated that the chief business of slaves is pastoral work.This tends to prove, thatamong true pastoral tribes slavery, as a system of labour, is of little moment. This inference is verified by several statements about slaves being often manumitted or in the course of time becoming practically free.Burckhardt, speaking of the slaves of the Aeneze Bedouins, says: “After a certain lapse of time they are always emancipated, and married to persons of their own colour”22.Among the Circassians slaves are often manumitted. A slave can also purchase his freedom, and then becomes a member of a Circassian fraternity23.The Beni Amer have two kinds of slaves, newly-purchased and native-born. “Their condition differs so much, that only the former may properly be called slaves; the latter are rather serfs. The newly-purchased slave is treated like every Mohammedan slave, he may be sold and does not yet belong to the family. The native-born slave has only the name, not the state of a slave; this appears from his being allowed to intermarry with the Woreza (subjected class). The children born of such a marriage are considered free, as they descend from a free mother. In Barka the Kishendoa,i.e.native-born slaves, who inhabit a camp of tents of their own, are governed by a chief who is one of their own number, and intermarry with the Woreza. Native-born slaves may live where they like and have the same right of inheritance as freemen; only if such[268]a slave leaves no relatives does the master succeed to his goods.… In the blood-feud too the native-born slave is in a peculiar condition. If a newly-purchased slave is killed, his price is restored to his owner; for such a slave is looked upon as an article of trade. The native-born slave, however, belongs to the family; therefore his blood requires blood; he is avenged by his relatives if there are such, and otherwise by his master; if this is not practicable because the murderer is a man of power, the matter is hushed up; but a compensation is never given”24.The Somal often buy slaves whom they manumit soon afterwards25.Among the Kafirs of India each tribe is governed by a council. Even slaves can be elected as members of this council26.Our survey of the work done by slaves shows in the third place, that slaves are often employed in warfare. This will be accounted for later on.Here we have only to emphasize the fact, that to pastoral tribes as such slave labour is of little use. This makes it easy to understand why so many of them dispense with slavery altogether.Going on to inquire what is the cause of this phenomenon, we may remember the general conclusion we have arrived at in the last paragraph, viz. that slave labour is of little use, where subsistence is either dependent on capital, or very difficult to procure. Now it is easy to see that among pastoral tribes subsistence entirely depends on capital. Among people who live upon the produce of their cattle, a man who owns no cattle,i.e.no capital, has no means of subsistence. Accordingly, among pastoral tribes we find rich and poor men; and the poor often offer themselves as labourers to the rich27.Among the Syrian Bedouins “to every tent, or to every two or three tents, there is a shepherd or person to attend the cattle, either a younger son or servant; he receives wages for ten months”28.[269]Among the Larbas alms are given to the poor. The social rank of the head of a family depends on the number of his children, his practical knowledge of the pastoral art, and his wealth. There are free labourers who are paid in kind. Herdsmen have the usufruct of a part of the herds they tend. Generally the labourer takes a tenth in kind at the close of the time agreed upon; moreover he receives his daily food during the time of his engagement29.Levchine, speaking of the Kazak Kirghiz, tells us: “Once I asked a Kirghiz, owner of 8000 horses, why he did not sell every year a part of his stud. He answered: “Why should I sell that which is my pleasure? I want no money; if I had any, I should be obliged to shut it up in a box, where nobody would see it; but when my steeds run over the steppe everybody looks at them; everybody knows that they are mine; and people always remember that I am rich.” In this manner is the reputation of being a rich man acquired throughout the hordes; such is the wealth that procures them the regard of their countrymen and the title ofbaï(rich man), which sometimes gives them an ascendency over the offspring of the khans and the most deserving old men.” On the other hand the number of beggars is very considerable. Levchine makes no mention of servants; but Radloff, who about thirty years later visited the Kazak Kirghiz, says: “There exists here a class of servants, whom I found in every well-to-do family. The herds are generally tended by hired herdsmen, who are subjected to a kind of supervision.” The rich also engage poor families to till their lands. A man who loses all his cattle has no resource left but to offer himself as a labourer30.The same first-rate ethnographer informs us that among the Altaians “rich and poor eat the same kind of food; the difference is only in the size of the kettle and the quantity of food. The poor man eats what he has got, which most frequently is very little; and he would starve but that the rich have such an abundance of food, that in summer they readily entertain whoever comes to theirjurts(tents).” When a beast[270]is being killed, the poor neighbours in large numbers throng towards the place and try to secure those portions of the bowels that the rich disdain; they have to fight for them with the dogs, who are equally fond of the delicacies. When all guests have been served, pieces of meat are thrown towards the door, where poor men and dogs try to secure them. The picked bones are also thrown to the poor, who clean them so thoroughly that nothing but the bare bone is left to the dogs. The cattle of the rich are generally tended by poor neighbours, who live in the vicinity of the rich, partake of their food, and receive their worn clothes. Young girls often seek employment as servants; orphans of poor men also serve the rich31.Among the Kalmucks there are poor people who serve the rich as herdsmen32.Prschewalsky states that rich Mongols, who own thousands of beasts, employ herdsmen who are poor and have no relations33.The Kurds of Eriwan employ freemen as herdsmen34.Among the Tunguz the poor generally serve the rich, by whom they are badly treated35.Yakuts, who have less than one head of cattle per soul, must hire themselves out for wages36.Pallas says: “Every Samoyede has his reindeer and tends them himself with the help of his family, except the very rich who employ poor men as herdsmen.” Von Stenin also states that the poor serve the rich. The following anecdote, given by this writer, shows how strongly the desire of wealth influences psychical life among the Samoyedes. One of them depicted the delight of intoxication in these terms: “Spirits taste better than meat. When a man is drunk, he fancies he has many reindeer and thinks himself a merchant. But on coming to his senses he sees that he is poor and has just spent his last reindeer in drinking”37.Of the Koryakes we are told: “Before they were subjected[271]by the Russians, they had neither government nor magistrates; only the rich exercised some authority over the poor.” Their greatest pleasure consists in looking at their herds. The poor are employed in tending the herds of the rich for food and clothing; if they have themselves some reindeer, they are allowed to join them to their master’s herds and tend them together with the latter38.Among the Tuski, according to Georgi, the poor serve the rich as herdsmen39.In North-East Africa the state of things is not quite the same. The pastoral nomads here form the nobility, and tax subjected tribes with tributes and compulsory labour. Servants are not found here so often as in Asia. Sometimes, however, they are found. Thus among the Beni Amer there are herdsmen, maid-servants etc. who work for wages40. The same, perhaps, applies to the Massai, where the man who owns large herds and many wives, enjoys high consideration but a poor man is despised41.“Among all South African natives” says Fritsch “the rich tyrannize over the poor who, in the hope of filling their stomachs, comply with a state of dependence that is not authorized by law”42.Among the Caffres poor men place themselves under the protection of a rich head of a family, build their huts in his kraal, and in reward yield their cattle to him43.Kropf tells us that among the Ama-Xosa the consideration a man enjoys depends on the number of cattle he owns. The poor are fed by the chief and in return render him services44.The Ovaherero despise any one who has no cattle. The rich support many people, who become their dependents, and so they acquire distinction and power45. The children of impoverished families who, according to Andersson46, are kept as slaves, are perhaps rather to be called servants.Among those tribes which are mainly agricultural, but besides[272]subsist largely upon the produce of their cattle, similar phenomena present themselves.Among the Ossetes freemen are often employed as servants47.Among the Bechuanas the possession of cattle and a waggon is a mark of distinction. They mix their porridge with curdled milk, and therefore call a poor man a water-porridge man48.Casalis gives an elaborate description of the value which the Basutos attach to the possession of cattle. Wealth, among them, consists in cattle, and this wealth is the base of the power of the chiefs. By means of the produce of their herds they feed the poor, procure arms for the warriors, support the troops in war and entertain good relations with neighbouring nations. Were a chief to lose his cattle, his power would be at an end49.The Barotse employ as herdsmen young slaves and sons of poor men50.Among the Dinka every man upon an average owns three head of cattle; but there are also poor men, who are the slaves or servants of the rich51. We may safely infer that these “slaves or servants” are servants and not slaves.The sheikh of each Chillook tribe, according to Chaillé Long, detains as slaves those who do not own even a single cow52. Probably the same state of things prevails here as among the Caffres: these poor men are not slaves, but compelled by hunger to seek the protection of a rich man.In the country of the Gallas the value of labour is very small53.The Bogos employ freemen as herdsmen and peasants; they also keep maid-servants54.Among the Amahlubi there are herdsmen, who serve for wages55.We see that, wherever men subsist by cattle-breeding, a peculiar characteristic of economic life presents itself. This characteristic is not the existence of wealth; for wealth also exists among the tribes of the Pacific Coast of North America; yet on the Pacific Coast slave labour is of great use. It is the[273]existence of poverty. On the Pacific Coast the “abundant natural supplies in ocean, stream, and forest” enable each man, be he rich or not, to provide for himself; but among pastoral tribes the means of subsistence are the property of individuals; and those who own no cattle have no resource but to apply to the owners for support56. Therefore, if labourers are wanted, there are always freemen who readily offer their services; and there is no great use for slave labour57.So there is always a supply of labour. On the other hand, the demand for labour is small. There is but little work to be done. Among some pastoral tribes the men spend a great deal of time in idleness58.Prschewalsky, speaking of the Mongols, remarks: “Unlimited laziness is a main characteristic of the nomads; they spend their whole life in idleness, which is furthered by the character of pastoral nomadism. The tending of the cattle is the sole occupation of the Mongol, and this does not nearly require all his time. The guarding of cows and sheep is the business of the women and grown-up children; milking, creaming, butter-making and other domestic labour falls almost entirely to the share of the mistress of the house. The men generally do nothing, and from morning till night ride from onejurt(tent) to another, drinkingkoumissand chattering with their neighbours. The chase, which the nomads are passionately fond of, serves mainly as a pastime.”The Altaians have to survey the cattle; this consists only in riding a few times a day to the herds, and driving them together. The milking of the mares during the summer, which requires some courage, is also the men’s business.Among the Aeneze Bedouins the men’s sole business is feeding the horses, and in the evening milking the camels59.[274]The Kazak Kirghiz, too, are very lazy. They pass a great part of the summer sleeping because of the warmth; and in winter-time they hardly ever leave their tents, because the snow covers the roads. As they are not acquainted with any arts, and the tending of the cattle is their only occupation, there is no need for much work60.Rowney tells us of the Mairs and Meenas of Rajpootana: “The ostensible occupation followed by them was that of goatherds; but the herds were usually left to the charge of their boys and old men, while the more able-bodied spent their time, mounted on their ponies, in marauding, plundering, and murdering”61.Among the Massai the men despise every kind of work. Only warfare is considered an occupation worthy of a man62.It has to be remarked that most of these tribes do not keep slaves; so it is not by imposing all the work upon slaves that the men are enabled to pass their time in idleness; yet they do almost nothing. “The herdsman is lazy,” says Schmoller63, and Schurtz speaks of the aversion from all hard and regular work, which characterizes the pastoral nomads64. This proves that but little labour is wanted. One might object, that perhaps women and boys are overworked. But the fact that the able-bodied men, who form a considerable part of the community, can afford to take life so very easily, sufficiently proves that the total amount of labour required is rather small.Here we find one more reason why pastoral tribes have little use for slave labour. The demand for labour is small; therefore, even if free labourers were not available, only a few slaves would be wanted. Capital is here the principal factor of production, labour holding a subordinate place. Among agricultural tribes, when there is a practically unlimited supply of fertile soil, every person whose labour is available to the tribe can cultivate a piece of ground, and so, the more people there are, the more food can be produced. But among pastoral tribes, as soon as there are people enough within the tribe to guard the cattle, milk the cows, and do the other[275]work required, an increase in the number of labourers is not profitable. There is only a limited demand for labour; therefore, though there may be a temporary scarcity of labour which makes strengthening of the labour forces of the tribe by means of slaves desirable,—when a few slaves have been procured, the point at which a further increase in the number of people gives no profit will soon be reached again.We see that among pastoral tribes little labour is required; and such as is, is easy to procure; for there are always people destitute of capital, who offer themselves as labourers. Therefore slaves are economically of little use.There is, however, one description of a pastoral tribe, in which it is stated, that men as well as women have to work very hard. This is Geoffroy’s capital monography on the Larbas. The head of the family and his sons have to guard the herds, trace and dig pits, share in all operations common to the horsemen of the tribe: raids and battles, the pursuing of thieves, the defense of the pecuniary interests of the family, the depositing of merchandise in theksours(store-houses). The head of the family tends the sick animals, and has the administration of the wool and grain; but practically he will not have much to do with these matters, not considering them worth his attention. But a great part of his time is taken up with keeping watch and marching, and this makes his life a rather hard one. He does not sleep at night; he waters the cattle in the pits orr’dirs; he surrounds his tents with a protecting hedge, thezirba; he struggles against the elements, which often disperse beasts, tents and men. Daily, from the cradle to the tomb, the nomad’s life is a struggle for existence. As a child he already has to look after the cattle; he learns to ride on horseback with his father. When older, whether rich or poor, he has to learn, for several years, to conduct large numbers of cattle, which is a very difficult and dangerous work, to tend the different kinds of animals, to cure them, to sell them, to derive from them as much profit as possible. Pastoral art is more complicated than at first sight it seems, and comprehends a long series of accomplishments. At twenty years the nomad is an accomplished man, thoroughly acquainted with the life he has to lead, enjoying all the physical[276]strength indispensable in the exceptionalmilieuwhere he has to struggle. The two youngest sons of the head of the family our informant describes, 15 and 13 years of age, now perform in the family the duties of herdsmen. Daily occupations of master and slaves are the driving together of the dispersed animals, the tending of the females that have calved, the preparing of special food for the young animals, the dressing of the stronger ones for the saddle and pack-saddle, and the chase of hares and gazelles65.We see that pastoral life is not so easy here as on the fertile plains of Central Asia. But the work that is most necessary here, and also most difficult, is the care for the security of the tribe and its possessions, or, as Geoffroy very appropriately expresses it, “c’est un peu toujours comme la guerre”. And this work cannot be left to slaves; else the slaves would become the masters of the tribe. Warriors are wanted here; labourers not so much.We have now accounted for the non-existence of slavery among many pastoral tribes, and the little use of slave labour among pastoral tribes in general, by the principle laid down in the last paragraph, that, generally speaking, slaves are not wanted where subsistence depends upon capital.In North-East Africa, however, there is one more cause at work, making slavery superfluous. This is the existence of a kind ofsubstitute for slavery, viz.subjection of tribes as such. Pastoral tribes often levy tributes on agricultural tribes, to which they are superior in military strength; the latter cannot easily leave the lands they cultivate and seek a new country; if not too heavily oppressed, they will prefer paying a tribute. And to pastoral nomads the levying of a tax on agricultural tribes brings far more profit than the enslaving of individuals belonging to such tribes, whom they would have to employ either in pastoral labour, which they do not want, or in tilling the soil, which work the nomads would be unable to supervise. There are also pastoral tribes subjected by other pastoral nomads, the latter forming the nobility and the military part of society. Finally we find subjected tribes of hunters, smiths,[277]etc.; here we have sometimes rather to deal with a voluntary division of labour66.The Somal have several pariah castes. Among the Wer-Singellis in North Somaliland we find the following: 1º. Midgân, smiths and traders; these, by acquiring considerable wealth, sometimes win so much regard, that even a Somali noble deigns to marry his daughter to a Midgân. 2º. Tómal, who are employed by Somali nobles as servants, herdsmen and camel-drivers, and are also obliged to go to war. The noble Wer-Singelli carries sword and spear, whereas the Tomali uses bow and arrows; sometimes a Midgân girl is given him as a wife, but never the daughter of a noble Somali. The Tómal, however, belong to the tribe. 3º. Jibbir, who are very much despised. They have no fixed habitations; they roam in families over the country, from tribe to tribe, as jugglers and magic doctors. Everybody, for fear of sorcery, gives them food and presents, and in return receives from them amulets, made of stone and roots. They contract no marriage outside their own caste67.The Massai, true warriors and raiders, “keep a subjected tribe, the Wa-rombutta, who do their hunting and what meagre agriculture they indulge in. This tribe is insignificant in appearance, and although servile and subject to the Massai are not slaves; they present almost the appearance of dwarfs.” The Wandorobo too, according to Thomson, are regarded by the Massai as a kind of serfs, and treated accordingly; and Johnston calls them a helot race of hunters and smiths68.Among the Bogos “patronage results from military subjection or from the helpless state of separate immigrants with regard to a strong and closely united nation. As the nobles carefully trace their pedigrees, it is easy to find out the Tigres. Tigre means a man of Ethiopian extraction, who speaks the Tigre language. Some Tigre families, subjected from time immemorial, have immigrated together with the family of Gebre Terke [the legendary ancestor of the Bogos]. Others already lived in[278]the country, and unable to withstand the invasion, hastened to submit in order to be tolerated. The Bogos seem to have taken possession of the country in a very pacific and forbearing way, and unlike the Normans and other European invaders, do not interfere with the regulation of landed property, so that the ancient aborigines still own most of the land. The third class is composed of foreign families who, being for some reason unable to agree with their countrymen, settle in the country of the Bogos and place themselves under their protection, which still continually occurs. A member of the Boas family [i.e.of the Bogos nobility], however poor and weak, never becomes a Tigre; his origin is a guarantee of his independence. A Tigre, however mighty and rich, cannot become a Schmagilly [noble]; for the Tigres, who are a compound of various elements, cannot trace their origin so far back as the Schmagillies who pretend to spring all from the same ancestor. Moreover, the oppression is so slight, that a revolution is unimaginable”69.Among the Takue the state of the Tigres is the same as among the Bogos; formerly they brought beer to their lords; now they pay them a small tribute of corn and fat70.Marea Tigres have a harder lot. Two kinds of obligations are incumbent on them: towards their respective masters, and towards the nobilityen bloc. Even the poorest noble never becomes a Tigre, and does not perform degrading work, such as for instance milking. The Tigre pays his master yearly 8 bottles of fat, a measure of corn, and every week a leathern bag with milk. Of every cow killed by a Tigre the master receives a considerable portion; a cow belonging to a Tigre, which dies a natural death, falls entirely to the master. As for the Tigres’ obligations towards the nobility as a whole, on several occasions they have to give up their cattle for the nobility. Among the Black Marea the Tigres own most of the land; among the Red Marea the greater part of the land is in the hands of impoverished nobles, who live chiefly upon the rent of their landed property. Another class are the Dokono, who are obliged to choose a patron and pay a tribute, but[279]are held in rather high esteem and often marry daughters of the nobles; they own land and herds and are much given to trading71.Among the Beni Amer the same distinction, of nobles and subjects, prevails. The latter are called Woréza. “We shall speak of master and servant,” says Munzinger “though the latter term does not quite answer the purpose. The state of things we are going to describe much resembles that which we have met with among the aristocrats of the Anseba; among the Beni Amer, however, the servant is a feoffee rather than a protégé. But as he derives his wealth from his master, to whom he owes what we may call interest, his state is one of much greater dependence.… Among the Beni Amer it is an ancient custom, that a lord distributes his wealth among his servants;e.g.if he receives 100 cows as his portion of the spoils of war, he does not add them to his herd, but leaves them to his servants as a present. When the servant marries, the lord presents him with a camel. In every emergency the servant applies to his lord, who helps him whenever possible. All these presents become the true property of the recipient; the servant may do with them as he likes, sell and even spend them; the lord may upbraid him for it, but legally has nothing to do with it. On the death of the servant the presents devolve upon his heirs. But the lord has a kind of usufruct of these presents; the servant provides him with fat and daily brings him a certain quantity of milk,i.e.he feeds the lord and his family. Often has the lord to wait for his supper till midnight, because the servant provides for himself first. The servant, moreover, has to provide the funeral sacrifice for his lord and for every member of the latter’s family; he leaves to the lord every sterile cow, and when he kills a beast he brings him the breast-piece. He stands by his lord in every emergency, and even assists him according to his means towards paying the tribute”. The servant is, so to speak, a tenant of his lord. As the Beni Amer are nomads, there is no land to distribute; the pasture has no owner; therefore the fief can only consist in movable property. As most of the wealth of the country is[280]in the hands of the servants, they have a decisive voice in every public council; they have to find out where the best pastures are, where the camp has to be erected72.Similar phenomena present themselves outside North-East Africa.In the second chapter of Part I we have met with subjected tribes in South Africa, such as Fengu, Makalahiri, etc., sometimes called slaves by our ethnographers73.Geoffroy speaks of settled tribes being in some way the vassals of the Larbas. Theksoursare buildings in which the nomads preserve their corn, dates and wool; these stores are guarded by settled tribes, that permanently live there and receive one tenth of the preserved stock yearly. The nomads look upon all settled tribes as degenerate beings and inferiors74. Here we have to deal with a voluntary division of labour, rather than with subjection.In Circassia, according to Bell, the serfs are prisoners of war and the ancient inhabitants of the country. The latter are perhaps the same peasants who, according to Klaproth, may not be sold apart from the land75.It is remarkable, that in Central Asia and Siberia we do not find a single instance of this subjection of tribes as such76. This is probably the reason why in these parts members of the tribe are so often employed as servants.Where nearly all work is left to subjected tribes or castes, and the nobles do nothing but fight, there is not much use for slave labour. The nobles do not want slaves, because all work required by them is performed by their subjects.We have now found a new cause, from which in some cases slaves are not wanted: the subjection of tribes as such, which serves as a substitute for slavery.[Contents]§ 2.Slavery among pastoral tribes.Yet several pastoral tribes keep slaves; this has still to be[281]accounted for. We shall inquire first, whether thesecondary causeswe have found in the last paragraph are at work here.1º.Condition of women.On the Pacific Coast of North America the men sometimes procure slaves, in order to relieve the women of a part of their task. There are some details on record suggestive of the same state of things among some pastoral tribes. Among the Circassians, Bahima and Beduan (pastoral tribes), Waganda, pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu, Ossetes and Gallas (agricultural tribes depending largely on cattle for their subsistence), slaves are employed for household work. The same is the case with female slaves among the Larbas and Somal of the towns. Munzinger states that only few Beduan are rich enough to keep a female slave or a maid-servant; therefore in most families the preparing of food falls to the share of the wife, this being almost her only occupation77. Hence we may infer that among the Beduan, and probably among some other tribes, slaves are procured by the men for the benefit of the women.2º.Preserving of food.This does not seem to require much labour among pastoral tribes. On the Pacific Coast of North America the fish have to be prepared for winter use. But where men live upon the products of their cattle, food is not at one time much more abundant than at another.3º.Trade and industry.Household work, sometimes performed by slaves, does not seem to serve the purposes of trade, as on the Pacific Coast; there is not a single detail on record, that would lead us to suppose that it does. We even find particulars tending to prove the contrary. Among the Beni Amer, who have many slaves, the women are continually occupied in making mats, the proceeds of which labour are often sufficient to pay the tribute to the Turks78. Slaves do not seem to join in this occupation.Among the Larbas free women manufacture tissues, which are sold abroad79. Probably slaves are not capable of performing such fine work.Among the Yorubas and pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu[282]the slaves are occupied in trading. But these tribes are not nomadic; moreover, these slaves do not, like the slaves on the Pacific Coast, prepare the articles of commerce, but are themselves the traders, which is quite another thing.4º.Slaves wanted as warriors.Slaves sometimes serve to augment the military strength of the community. From the survey of the work done by slaves, given in the beginning of this chapter, it appears that they are often employed in warfare, viz. among the nomadic Somal and Danakil, Kafirs, pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu, Mandingoes and Yorubas; probably also among the Bogos, where they generally take to robbery. Circassian slaves cannot be compelled to go to war80. Hence it seems to follow that they may go if they like. Among the Beni Amer native-born slaves are avenged by their own relatives; so these slaves are armed, and probably fight together with their masters.The ensuing statement strikingly shows how highly slaves are valued as warriors among the nomadic Somal and Danakil. If a slave kills one enemy, he becomes free; if two or more, he is entitled to being adopted. Having killed ten enemies, he becomes a person of rank and enjoys many privileges81.In these cases slaves strengthen the military force of the tribe. But the tribe profits only indirectly by this reinforcement of the family. Most pastoral nomads live in comparatively small groups, rather independently; there is no strong central government82. And where quarrels between these small groups are frequent, the more numerous the family (in the wider sense, the Romanfamilia, including slaves), the better will the head of the family be able to maintain his position83. And pastoral nomads have always a great motive for fighting: they can enrich themselves by a successful raid. Among hunting, fishing, and agricultural tribes, if the conqueror does not want to keep the vanquished as slaves, war gives little profit84. But[283]in the raids pastoral nomads make on each other, the successful raider may acquire numerous herds,i.e.great wealth. Therefore it is of the utmost importance for a man to have as numerous afamiliaas possible.When speaking of the Larbas, we have seen that their mode of life isun peu toujours comme la guerre. Their describer states: “Theft is the most threatening evil the nomad has to deal with; he is therefore most severe in suppressing it, the punishment being invariably death.” He also speaks of free servants, members of the family, who live under the protection and at the expense of some rich head of a family; they are generally very numerous, and form a body of clients that strengthens their patron’s power85.Levchine, speaking of the Kazak Kirghiz, says: “Their feuds are caused by the unrestrained desire for plunder, that ruins and entirely demoralizes them; this plundering is calledbaranta, Thesebarantasconsist in reciprocal cattle-stealing, from which often sanguinary combats result.… And we must not think that public hatred or contempt falls on those who are addicted to these horrible excesses; on the contrary, they enjoy a reputation for bravery, and are distinguished by the name ofBatyrorBoghatyr, which name spreads through all the hordes the fame of their exploits. Many of these braves, calledBatyrfor their plundering ardour, though many years dead, still live in the remembrance of their countrymen, and their names are celebrated.” Accordingly, one of the qualities required in a chief is a large family, that gives him the power to maintain his authority86.Among the Beni Amer, where it seems to be quite an ordinary thing for a noble to receive 100 cows as his portion of the spoils of war, it is a great support for a man to have many children, as in these countries family is opposed to family87.A writer of the 18thcentury tells us that “the Chukchi who live to the north of the river Anadir, are not subjected to the Russian empire, and often make raids on those brought under Russian control, on the Koryakes as well as on the Chukchi,[284]killing or making prisoners all they meet, and carrying off their herds of reindeer”88.Among the Somal and Gallas internal wars are very frequent; among the former most wars are marauding expeditions. And here too the possession of wife and children is indispensable; an unmarried man cannot attain to wealth and power89.Among the Ama-Xosa and Ovaherero the chief object of warfare is cattle-stealing. Fugitives from other tribes are never delivered up by the Ama-Xosa, whatever the reason of their flight; for they strengthen the chief’s power. Another fact, showing the great importance they attach to the numerical strength of their tribe, is this, that he who kills a man or womanbyaccident has to pay a fine to the chief, as a compensation for the loss sufferedbythe government of the tribe90.We have already seen that the Massai are “true warriors and raiders” and that the Mairs and Meenas spend their time in “marauding, plundering and murdering”91.We see that among these tribes everybody is desirous of having as many people about him as possible for the protection of his own property and the capturing of his neighbour’s. And a convenient means of procuring such people is the purchase of slaves.There is one more secondary cause here, which we have not met with before. It is sometimes stated that keeping slaves is a mereluxury. Now rich nomads, like all rich people, love luxury. Like the rich Kazak Kirghiz who told Levchine that the possession of over 8000 horses procured him a reputation among his countrymen, many rich nomads will win renown by possessing a large retinue of slaves. Thus for instance we know that among the Beni Amer slave labour is of little use; yet it is stated, that the Beni Amer are ambitious to possess many slaves92. And slaves are preferable, as objects of luxury, to free servants. For slaves, generally acquired from beyond the limits of the tribe, are much more apt to gratify the pride of the rich man by their submission, than poor freemen,[285]who are always conscious of theirmembershipof the tribe and unwilling to be trampled down. The latter fact is proved by several statements of ethnographers.If a rich Samoyede refuses to give his poor countryman a reindeer for food, the latter has the right to carry off one or more from the rich man’s herd; the law does not give the owner any hold upon him93.Among the Yakuts, according to Müller, the rich sustain their poor fellow-tribesmen; if the latter lose their reindeer, they are indemnified by the rich. Another writer tells us that the poor, when dying of hunger, refrain from slaughtering an animal, from fear of losing their independence94.Similarly among the Ostyaks “members of the same tribe, whether large or small, consider themselves as relations, even where the common ancestor is unknown, and where the evidence of consanguinity is wholly wanting. Nevertheless, the feeling of consanguinity, sometimes real, sometimes conventional, is the fundamental principle of the union. The rich, of which there are few, help the poor, who are many. There is not much that can change hands. The little, however, that is wanted by the needy is taken as a right rather than a favour”95.The Altaians are very sensitive about their liberty. “Every poor man who joins a rich family considers himself a member of it. He will perish of hunger, rather than comply with a demand of his rich neighbour made in a commanding tone”96.Licata tells us that hungry Danakil go to their chief and say: “I am hungry, give me something to eat”97.Among the Larbas free labourers “work for one more fortunate than themselves, but not for a superior; for notwithstanding the relation of employer and employed, equality prevails”98.It is easy to understand that slaves are preferred to such servants. Only in one case is this preference mentioned by an ethnographer. Munzinger states that the slaves bought by the rich Beduan for household work are generally more trusted[286]than ordinary servants, as they are riveted to their position99. But we may safely suppose that in other cases also this circumstance has furthered the growth of slavery.We have explained why pastoral tribes have no great use for slave labour. We have also mentioned some motives that may induce such tribes to keep slaves. But the fact has not yet been accounted for, that some pastoral tribes keep slaves and others do not. Whence this difference? It has been shown that slavery does not only exist among pastoral tribes that till the soil to a limited extent. Among all pastoral tribes subsistence is dependent on capital. Wealth, too, exists among all these tribes100; and we cannot see why slaves, as a luxury, would be wanted by one such tribe more than by another. As slaves are sometimes employed as warriors, we might be inclined to suppose that slavery exists among all warlike tribes, and among these only. But there are several pastoral tribes which, though very warlike, do not keep slaves: Kazak Kirghiz, Turkomans, Massai, and some pastoral nomads of South Africa.That the subjection of tribes as such in stead of individual slaves, of which we have spoken in the last paragraph, cannot account for all cases in which slavery does not exist, becomes evident, if we take into consideration that most of the pastoral tribes of North-East Africa, which keep other tribes in subjection, practise slavery, whereas in Central Asia and Siberia we find neither subjected tribes nor slaves.Therefore there must be other causes.In chapter II we have spoken ofexternal causes: it may be that slaves would be of great use, and yet cannot be kept, because the coercive power of the tribe is not strong enough. We have also seen that this coercive power is most strongly developed where men have fixed habitations, live in rather large groups and preserve food for the time of scarcity, and where there is a group of somewhat homogeneous tribes maintaining, constant relations with each other. Pastoral tribes are nomadic,[287]do not live together in very large groups, and do not want to preserve food, for they have their supply of food always at hand. Yet the fact that several pastoral tribes keep slaves proves that at least among these the coercive power is strong enough. We shall try to find a cause peculiar to these tribes, that enables them to keep slaves. Now it is remarkable that our positive cases are nearly all of them found in a few definite parts of the globe: North-East Africa, the Caucasus, and Arabia; whereas the pastoral nomads of Siberia, Central Asia, India, and South Africa, with one exception (the Ovaherero), do not keep slaves. And the parts where slavery exists are exactly those where the slave-trade has for a long time been carried on on a large scale. Accordingly, the slaves these tribes keep are often purchased from slave-traders and in several cases belong to inferior races.The slaves of the Aeneze Bedouins are Negroes101.The slaves kept by the Larbas are Negroes purchased from slave-trading caravans102.Although we find no description of slave-trade among the Circassians, slaves in the Caucasus are exported on a large scale103.Most slaves found among the Somal and Danakil are articles of transit trade: they are purchased from interior tribes and intended to be sold to Arabians. A Somali never becomes the slave of a Somali, and prisoners of war are not enslaved104.Many Beduan make it their business to steal slaves, whom they sell in Massowah105.The slaves kept by the Beni Amer are either captured from enemies or purchased abroad; a Beni Amer never loses his freedom. Slaves are not, however, often sold abroad106.On the other hand, the pastoral tribes of Central Asia and Siberia live in secluded parts, far from the centres of the slave-trade.The slave-trade greatly facilitates the keeping of slaves. Where slaves are brought by slave-dealers from remote parts, it is much easier to keep them than where they have to be[288]captured from enemies,i.e.from the neighbours; in the latter case the slaves are very likely to run away and return to their native country; but a purchased slave transported from a great distance cannot so easily return; if he succeeded in escaping, he would be instantly recaptured by one of the foreign tribes whose countries he would have to traverse. Moreover, some tribes may, by their intercourse with slave-traders, have become familiar with the idea of slavery, and so the slave-trade may have suggested to them the keeping of slaves for their own use.There is another circumstance, which may partially account for the existence of slavery among some of these tribes: the slaves are often Negroes. And Negroes have always and everywhere been enslaved; they seem to be more fit for slaves than most races of mankind. Galton, speaking of the Damaras, says: “These savages court slavery. You engage one of them as a servant, and you find that he considers himself your property, and that you are, in fact, become the owner of a slave. They have no independence about them, generally speaking, but follow a master as spaniels would. Their hero-worship is directed to people who have wit and strength enough to ill-use them. Revenge is a very transient passion in their character, it gives way to admiration of the oppressor. The Damaras seem to me to love nothing; the only strong feelings they possess, which are not utterly gross and sensual, are those of admiration and fear. They seem to be made for slavery, and naturally fall into its ways”107. And Hutter, describing the Bali tribes of Cameroon, remarks that the Negro wants to be ruled and patiently endures any amount of oppression108. Similar descriptions may undoubtedly be given of many other Negro tribes. Moreover several slave-keeping nomadic tribes are Semites and Hamites, and therefore look upon the Negroes as an inferior race. Now, where slaves are procured mainly for military purposes (and we have seen that this is often the case with pastoral tribes), an absorption of foreigners into the tribe would answer the purpose as well as, and perhaps better than, slavery. But where the foreigners belong to inferior races, the members of the tribe[289]are not likely to intermarry with them and look upon them as their equals; they remain slaves, though they are not of great use as such. We must also take into consideration that inferior races are not so much to be dreaded as superior peoples; the latter, if individuals belonging to them were kept as slaves, might retaliate upon the slave-owners. This may have been the reason why the Kazak Kirghiz who, in Levchine’s time, kidnapped many Russians, always sold them abroad: it would not have been safe to keep them as slaves. Accordingly, Pallas states that in his time they used to kidnap men on the Russian frontiers towards the time when they were going to remove with their herds, so that they could not be pursued109.In the second chapter of this Part we have remarked that the growth of slavery is furthered by the existence of a group of more or less similar tribes, the slave-trade being in such cases the means of spreading slavery over the group. We may say now that, whether such a group exists or not, the slave-trade facilitates the keeping of slaves. When the coercive power of a tribe is not strong enough for the keeping of prisoners as slaves, the slave-trade may enable such a tribe to keep slaves; for the keeping of purchased slaves, brought from a great distance, does not require so much coercive power.We see that the difference between the slave-keeping and the other pastoral tribes consists in external circumstances. Pastoral tribes have no strong motives for making slaves, for the use of slave labour is small. On the other hand, there are no causes absolutely preventing them from keeping slaves. These tribes are, so to speak, in a state of equilibrium; a small additional cause on either side turns the balance. One such additional cause is the slave-trade; another is the neighbourhood of inferior races. There may be other small additional causes, peculiar to single tribes. We shall not inquire whether there are, but content ourselves with the foregoing conclusions, of which the principal are these, that the taming of animals does not naturally lead to the taming of men, and that the relation between capital and labour among pastoral tribes renders the economic use of slavery very small.[290]Recapitulating, we may remark that our general theory, that there is no great use for slave labour where subsistence depends on capital, is fully verified by our investigation of economic life among pastoral tribes.Two secondary internal causes found in the second chapter have been also met with among pastoral tribes: slaves are sometimes employed in warfare, and sometimes for domestic labour to relieve the women of their task. Two new secondary factors have been found in this chapter: slaves are kept as a luxury; and sometimes the subjection of tribes as such, serving as a substitute for slavery, makes slavery proper superfluous.With regard to the external causes it has been shown that the coercive power of pastoral tribes is not very strong, as they are nomadic and live in rather small groups; but this want is sometimes compensated for by the slave-trade and the neighbourhood of inferior races. The two latter circumstances may therefore rank as new external causes, the slave-trade taking the place of the existence of a homogeneous group. On the Pacific Coast of N. America it is the trade between tribes of the same culture, among pastoral nomads it is the trade with Arabia, etc.; but in either case it is the slave-trade that furthers the growth of slavery.Recapitulation of the causes we have found up to the present.Furthering the growth of slavery.Hindering the growth of slavery.I. Internal causes.A.General.1º. Subsistence easily acquired and not dependent on capital.1º. Subsistence dependent on capital.2º. Subsistence not dependent on capital, but difficult to procure.[291]B.Secondary economic:1º. Preserving of food.1º. Female labour making slave labour superfluous.2º. Trade and industry.3º. A high position of women.2º. Subjection of tribes as such.C.Secondary non-economic:1º. Slaves wanted for military purposes.1º. Militarism making slavery impossible.2º. Slaves kept as a luxury.II. External causes:1º. Fixed habitations.2º. Living in large groups.3º. Preserving of food110.4º. The slave-trade.5º. The neighbourhood of inferior races.[292]

[Contents]CHAPTER III.PASTORAL TRIBES.[Contents]§ 1.Capital and labour among pastoral tribes.The number of these tribes is not large, as they are found in a few parts of the world only. Moreover, the descriptions available to us were in many cases too incomplete to justify any inference as to their having or not having slaves.The clear cases noticed by us are the following.Positive cases.Arabia:Aeneze Bedouins,Larbas.2Caucasus:Circassians,Kabards.2Bantu tribes:Ovaherero,Bahima.2Hamitic group:Beduan,Beni Amer,Somal,Danakil.410Negative cases.India:Todas.1Central Asia:Kazak Kirghiz,Altaians,Turkomans.3Siberia:Samoyedes,Tunguz,Yakuts,nomadic Koryakes.4[263]Bantu tribes:Ama-Xosa,Ama-Zulu,some divisions of the Mundombe.3Hamatic group:Massai.112We see that there are almost as many positive as negative cases. So those theorists are wrong, who hold that the taming of animals naturally leads to the taming of men1.It might, however, be that the non-existence of slavery in our negative cases were due to a special, external cause, viz. that these tribes were so inclosed between more powerful nations as not to be able to procure slaves, though slaves would be of much use to them. A brief survey of the political state of these tribes shows that they are not all in this position. The Kazak Kirghiz, in Levchine’s time, kidnapped slaves whom they sold abroad. The Massai are very warlike and adopt captives. The Turkomans are “the intermediate agents for carrying on the slave-trade”2. The Ama-Xosa and Ama-Zulu are also very warlike3. We see that there are some pastoral tribes that, though able to procure slaves, do not keep any. The non-existence of slavery among them must be due to other, more internal, causes.It might also be that our positive cases were exceptions to a general rule. For many pastoral tribes, though subsisting mainly by cattle-breeding, carry on agriculture besides. If these only kept slaves, and employed them chiefly in work connected with agriculture, slavery would prove foreign to pastoral nomadism as such; for then these tribes would only keep slaves in their quality as agriculturists.We shall inquire whether this be so; and for this purpose we shall give a survey of the work imposed upon slaves among pastoral tribes. This survey, besides enabling us to decide upon the question at issue, will show what place slavery occupies in pastoral life.Among the Larbas the boys (also free boys) guard the cattle[264]on the pasture-ground, whereas the work that requires more skill (the tending of young animals, the breaking of horses, etc.) is equally divided between master and slaves4.Circassian slaves, according to Bell, till the soil, tend the cattle and perform domestic labour. Klaproth, however, states that the peasants may only be sold together with the land; so they are rather a kind of serfs. Domestic slaves may be sold separately5.According to Roscoe, among the Bahima, “the women’s duties are to wash the milk pots, perhaps it would be better to say see the pots are washed, because the work generally falls upon the slaves to perform”6.Munzinger speaks of domestic labour being imposed on slaves by the Beduan. Most of these slaves are women7.Among the Beni Amer it is considered an honour to have many slaves. “Properly speaking slaves serve their master only when children. Adult female slaves are concubines, live with their master, but are exempt from nearly all labour; adult male slaves generally despise all work, and belong to the retinue of the master. The master derives no real profit from his slaves.” According to Von Müller the fabrication of tar falls to the share of the slave, such work being below the dignity of a freeman8.Paulitschke tells us that among the nomadic Somal and Danakil slavery is not profitable; for the territories inhabited by them are thinly peopled, agriculture is insignificant, and these cattle-breeders get their subsistence rather easily; moreover they would be unable to support a considerable number of slaves by the produce of their cattle. Therefore among the Danakil on the river Aussa and the Rahanwîn Somal on the lower Wêbi-Schabêli, where slaves are employed in agriculture, there is more use for slave labour. Among the nomadic Somal and Danakil slaves appear also to be employed in warfare. According to Bottego, whose account applies to the Somal of the towns, adult male slaves till the soil, build houses, and perform the rudest and most fatiguing kinds of work. The[265]boys lead the cattle to the pasture-ground; the women are employed in household work and often are concubines of their masters9.There are some tribes that subsist mainly on agriculture, but also, to a great extent, on cattle-breeding. It may be of some use to give a survey of the work done by slaves, among them too; it will appear, then, whether they keep their slaves for agricultural purposes only, or employ them also for pastoral work.Among the Kafirs some slaves are blacksmiths. In war a slave boy beats the drum10. Our informant speaks only incidentally of slave labour; he does not mean to say that this is the only work performed by slaves.Among the Barotse young slaves are given as pages to the children of freemen. Slaves till the soil and tend the cattle; slave boys are employed as herdsmen11.In a description of the Waganda it is said: “One of the principal evils resulting from slavery in Uganda is that it causes all manual labour to be looked upon as derogatory to the dignity of a free man”12.Among the Mandingoes native-born slaves enjoy much liberty; they tend the cattle, and go to war, even without their masters. Freemen work as much as slaves. Every Mandingo, to whatever class he belongs, is occupied in agriculture. The tending of horses is incumbent on slave boys13.Hildebrandt states that the occupations of the Sakalavas are not many. In North Sakalavaland, however, rice is cultivated for export, and so there is more labour wanted here; therefore in this district slavery prevails to a large extent14.Among the Bogos there are hardly 200 slaves (whereas Munzinger estimates the total population at 8400). Slaves are of little use to their owners. Male slaves live separately and generally take to robbery. Female slaves, having no opportunity to marry, become prostitutes and live rather independently15.[266]The Takue have very few slaves. In their laws and customs they show a close resemblance to the Bogos16.Among the pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu agriculture is incumbent on slaves. The slaves also share in their masters’ slave-raids. Jansen gives some more details about the work of slaves in the Sulu Islands. The ordinary occupations of slaves are agriculture, fishing, manufacture of salt, trade, and domestic work17.The slaves of the Geges and Nagos of Porto Novo are chiefly employed in agriculture18.Among the Ossetes the slaves perform household work; the peasants are serfs19.The slaves captured and purchased by the Gallas are generally sold to foreign traders; in large households they are sometimes retained and employed in various kinds of work. In another place our informant states that most slaves are employed in agriculture20.Yoruba slaves are employed in trade and warfare21.We see that slaves are employed in agriculture among the agricultural Somal and Danakil, Fulbe, Barotse, Mandingoes, Sakalavas, pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu, Geges and Nagos, Gallas; and very probably also among the Waganda, where they perform “all manual labour.” As the details given by our ethnographers are not always complete, it is possible that in some more cases slaves are employed in agriculture. But it is sufficiently clear, that among the Beni Amer, nomadic Somal and Danakil, Bogos, and probably also among the Beduan and Takue, slaves do not till the soil. Among the Ossetes and Circassians the peasants are serfs, slaves being employed in household work. What work is incumbent on slaves among the Aeneze Bedouins we are not told; but agriculture seems to be unknown among them. Among the Larbas the daily work is equally divided between master and slaves, agriculture holding a very subordinate place. Hence it appears that several of these tribes keep slaves, though they do not[267]employ them in agriculture; pastoral tribes, as such, sometimes keep slaves.But another inference we can draw from the foregoing survey of slave labour is this. Where slaves are not employed in agriculture or in such other work as requires a settled life (e.g.house-building among the Somal of the towns, fishing and manufacture of salt among the pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu), the use of slave labour is not great. Among the Beni Amer, Bogos, and nomadic Somal and Danakil slave-keeping is stated to be a mere luxury. The Sakalavas, except in the rice-exporting district, do not want much slave labour. And only in one case, viz. among the Larbas, is it clearly stated that the chief business of slaves is pastoral work.This tends to prove, thatamong true pastoral tribes slavery, as a system of labour, is of little moment. This inference is verified by several statements about slaves being often manumitted or in the course of time becoming practically free.Burckhardt, speaking of the slaves of the Aeneze Bedouins, says: “After a certain lapse of time they are always emancipated, and married to persons of their own colour”22.Among the Circassians slaves are often manumitted. A slave can also purchase his freedom, and then becomes a member of a Circassian fraternity23.The Beni Amer have two kinds of slaves, newly-purchased and native-born. “Their condition differs so much, that only the former may properly be called slaves; the latter are rather serfs. The newly-purchased slave is treated like every Mohammedan slave, he may be sold and does not yet belong to the family. The native-born slave has only the name, not the state of a slave; this appears from his being allowed to intermarry with the Woreza (subjected class). The children born of such a marriage are considered free, as they descend from a free mother. In Barka the Kishendoa,i.e.native-born slaves, who inhabit a camp of tents of their own, are governed by a chief who is one of their own number, and intermarry with the Woreza. Native-born slaves may live where they like and have the same right of inheritance as freemen; only if such[268]a slave leaves no relatives does the master succeed to his goods.… In the blood-feud too the native-born slave is in a peculiar condition. If a newly-purchased slave is killed, his price is restored to his owner; for such a slave is looked upon as an article of trade. The native-born slave, however, belongs to the family; therefore his blood requires blood; he is avenged by his relatives if there are such, and otherwise by his master; if this is not practicable because the murderer is a man of power, the matter is hushed up; but a compensation is never given”24.The Somal often buy slaves whom they manumit soon afterwards25.Among the Kafirs of India each tribe is governed by a council. Even slaves can be elected as members of this council26.Our survey of the work done by slaves shows in the third place, that slaves are often employed in warfare. This will be accounted for later on.Here we have only to emphasize the fact, that to pastoral tribes as such slave labour is of little use. This makes it easy to understand why so many of them dispense with slavery altogether.Going on to inquire what is the cause of this phenomenon, we may remember the general conclusion we have arrived at in the last paragraph, viz. that slave labour is of little use, where subsistence is either dependent on capital, or very difficult to procure. Now it is easy to see that among pastoral tribes subsistence entirely depends on capital. Among people who live upon the produce of their cattle, a man who owns no cattle,i.e.no capital, has no means of subsistence. Accordingly, among pastoral tribes we find rich and poor men; and the poor often offer themselves as labourers to the rich27.Among the Syrian Bedouins “to every tent, or to every two or three tents, there is a shepherd or person to attend the cattle, either a younger son or servant; he receives wages for ten months”28.[269]Among the Larbas alms are given to the poor. The social rank of the head of a family depends on the number of his children, his practical knowledge of the pastoral art, and his wealth. There are free labourers who are paid in kind. Herdsmen have the usufruct of a part of the herds they tend. Generally the labourer takes a tenth in kind at the close of the time agreed upon; moreover he receives his daily food during the time of his engagement29.Levchine, speaking of the Kazak Kirghiz, tells us: “Once I asked a Kirghiz, owner of 8000 horses, why he did not sell every year a part of his stud. He answered: “Why should I sell that which is my pleasure? I want no money; if I had any, I should be obliged to shut it up in a box, where nobody would see it; but when my steeds run over the steppe everybody looks at them; everybody knows that they are mine; and people always remember that I am rich.” In this manner is the reputation of being a rich man acquired throughout the hordes; such is the wealth that procures them the regard of their countrymen and the title ofbaï(rich man), which sometimes gives them an ascendency over the offspring of the khans and the most deserving old men.” On the other hand the number of beggars is very considerable. Levchine makes no mention of servants; but Radloff, who about thirty years later visited the Kazak Kirghiz, says: “There exists here a class of servants, whom I found in every well-to-do family. The herds are generally tended by hired herdsmen, who are subjected to a kind of supervision.” The rich also engage poor families to till their lands. A man who loses all his cattle has no resource left but to offer himself as a labourer30.The same first-rate ethnographer informs us that among the Altaians “rich and poor eat the same kind of food; the difference is only in the size of the kettle and the quantity of food. The poor man eats what he has got, which most frequently is very little; and he would starve but that the rich have such an abundance of food, that in summer they readily entertain whoever comes to theirjurts(tents).” When a beast[270]is being killed, the poor neighbours in large numbers throng towards the place and try to secure those portions of the bowels that the rich disdain; they have to fight for them with the dogs, who are equally fond of the delicacies. When all guests have been served, pieces of meat are thrown towards the door, where poor men and dogs try to secure them. The picked bones are also thrown to the poor, who clean them so thoroughly that nothing but the bare bone is left to the dogs. The cattle of the rich are generally tended by poor neighbours, who live in the vicinity of the rich, partake of their food, and receive their worn clothes. Young girls often seek employment as servants; orphans of poor men also serve the rich31.Among the Kalmucks there are poor people who serve the rich as herdsmen32.Prschewalsky states that rich Mongols, who own thousands of beasts, employ herdsmen who are poor and have no relations33.The Kurds of Eriwan employ freemen as herdsmen34.Among the Tunguz the poor generally serve the rich, by whom they are badly treated35.Yakuts, who have less than one head of cattle per soul, must hire themselves out for wages36.Pallas says: “Every Samoyede has his reindeer and tends them himself with the help of his family, except the very rich who employ poor men as herdsmen.” Von Stenin also states that the poor serve the rich. The following anecdote, given by this writer, shows how strongly the desire of wealth influences psychical life among the Samoyedes. One of them depicted the delight of intoxication in these terms: “Spirits taste better than meat. When a man is drunk, he fancies he has many reindeer and thinks himself a merchant. But on coming to his senses he sees that he is poor and has just spent his last reindeer in drinking”37.Of the Koryakes we are told: “Before they were subjected[271]by the Russians, they had neither government nor magistrates; only the rich exercised some authority over the poor.” Their greatest pleasure consists in looking at their herds. The poor are employed in tending the herds of the rich for food and clothing; if they have themselves some reindeer, they are allowed to join them to their master’s herds and tend them together with the latter38.Among the Tuski, according to Georgi, the poor serve the rich as herdsmen39.In North-East Africa the state of things is not quite the same. The pastoral nomads here form the nobility, and tax subjected tribes with tributes and compulsory labour. Servants are not found here so often as in Asia. Sometimes, however, they are found. Thus among the Beni Amer there are herdsmen, maid-servants etc. who work for wages40. The same, perhaps, applies to the Massai, where the man who owns large herds and many wives, enjoys high consideration but a poor man is despised41.“Among all South African natives” says Fritsch “the rich tyrannize over the poor who, in the hope of filling their stomachs, comply with a state of dependence that is not authorized by law”42.Among the Caffres poor men place themselves under the protection of a rich head of a family, build their huts in his kraal, and in reward yield their cattle to him43.Kropf tells us that among the Ama-Xosa the consideration a man enjoys depends on the number of cattle he owns. The poor are fed by the chief and in return render him services44.The Ovaherero despise any one who has no cattle. The rich support many people, who become their dependents, and so they acquire distinction and power45. The children of impoverished families who, according to Andersson46, are kept as slaves, are perhaps rather to be called servants.Among those tribes which are mainly agricultural, but besides[272]subsist largely upon the produce of their cattle, similar phenomena present themselves.Among the Ossetes freemen are often employed as servants47.Among the Bechuanas the possession of cattle and a waggon is a mark of distinction. They mix their porridge with curdled milk, and therefore call a poor man a water-porridge man48.Casalis gives an elaborate description of the value which the Basutos attach to the possession of cattle. Wealth, among them, consists in cattle, and this wealth is the base of the power of the chiefs. By means of the produce of their herds they feed the poor, procure arms for the warriors, support the troops in war and entertain good relations with neighbouring nations. Were a chief to lose his cattle, his power would be at an end49.The Barotse employ as herdsmen young slaves and sons of poor men50.Among the Dinka every man upon an average owns three head of cattle; but there are also poor men, who are the slaves or servants of the rich51. We may safely infer that these “slaves or servants” are servants and not slaves.The sheikh of each Chillook tribe, according to Chaillé Long, detains as slaves those who do not own even a single cow52. Probably the same state of things prevails here as among the Caffres: these poor men are not slaves, but compelled by hunger to seek the protection of a rich man.In the country of the Gallas the value of labour is very small53.The Bogos employ freemen as herdsmen and peasants; they also keep maid-servants54.Among the Amahlubi there are herdsmen, who serve for wages55.We see that, wherever men subsist by cattle-breeding, a peculiar characteristic of economic life presents itself. This characteristic is not the existence of wealth; for wealth also exists among the tribes of the Pacific Coast of North America; yet on the Pacific Coast slave labour is of great use. It is the[273]existence of poverty. On the Pacific Coast the “abundant natural supplies in ocean, stream, and forest” enable each man, be he rich or not, to provide for himself; but among pastoral tribes the means of subsistence are the property of individuals; and those who own no cattle have no resource but to apply to the owners for support56. Therefore, if labourers are wanted, there are always freemen who readily offer their services; and there is no great use for slave labour57.So there is always a supply of labour. On the other hand, the demand for labour is small. There is but little work to be done. Among some pastoral tribes the men spend a great deal of time in idleness58.Prschewalsky, speaking of the Mongols, remarks: “Unlimited laziness is a main characteristic of the nomads; they spend their whole life in idleness, which is furthered by the character of pastoral nomadism. The tending of the cattle is the sole occupation of the Mongol, and this does not nearly require all his time. The guarding of cows and sheep is the business of the women and grown-up children; milking, creaming, butter-making and other domestic labour falls almost entirely to the share of the mistress of the house. The men generally do nothing, and from morning till night ride from onejurt(tent) to another, drinkingkoumissand chattering with their neighbours. The chase, which the nomads are passionately fond of, serves mainly as a pastime.”The Altaians have to survey the cattle; this consists only in riding a few times a day to the herds, and driving them together. The milking of the mares during the summer, which requires some courage, is also the men’s business.Among the Aeneze Bedouins the men’s sole business is feeding the horses, and in the evening milking the camels59.[274]The Kazak Kirghiz, too, are very lazy. They pass a great part of the summer sleeping because of the warmth; and in winter-time they hardly ever leave their tents, because the snow covers the roads. As they are not acquainted with any arts, and the tending of the cattle is their only occupation, there is no need for much work60.Rowney tells us of the Mairs and Meenas of Rajpootana: “The ostensible occupation followed by them was that of goatherds; but the herds were usually left to the charge of their boys and old men, while the more able-bodied spent their time, mounted on their ponies, in marauding, plundering, and murdering”61.Among the Massai the men despise every kind of work. Only warfare is considered an occupation worthy of a man62.It has to be remarked that most of these tribes do not keep slaves; so it is not by imposing all the work upon slaves that the men are enabled to pass their time in idleness; yet they do almost nothing. “The herdsman is lazy,” says Schmoller63, and Schurtz speaks of the aversion from all hard and regular work, which characterizes the pastoral nomads64. This proves that but little labour is wanted. One might object, that perhaps women and boys are overworked. But the fact that the able-bodied men, who form a considerable part of the community, can afford to take life so very easily, sufficiently proves that the total amount of labour required is rather small.Here we find one more reason why pastoral tribes have little use for slave labour. The demand for labour is small; therefore, even if free labourers were not available, only a few slaves would be wanted. Capital is here the principal factor of production, labour holding a subordinate place. Among agricultural tribes, when there is a practically unlimited supply of fertile soil, every person whose labour is available to the tribe can cultivate a piece of ground, and so, the more people there are, the more food can be produced. But among pastoral tribes, as soon as there are people enough within the tribe to guard the cattle, milk the cows, and do the other[275]work required, an increase in the number of labourers is not profitable. There is only a limited demand for labour; therefore, though there may be a temporary scarcity of labour which makes strengthening of the labour forces of the tribe by means of slaves desirable,—when a few slaves have been procured, the point at which a further increase in the number of people gives no profit will soon be reached again.We see that among pastoral tribes little labour is required; and such as is, is easy to procure; for there are always people destitute of capital, who offer themselves as labourers. Therefore slaves are economically of little use.There is, however, one description of a pastoral tribe, in which it is stated, that men as well as women have to work very hard. This is Geoffroy’s capital monography on the Larbas. The head of the family and his sons have to guard the herds, trace and dig pits, share in all operations common to the horsemen of the tribe: raids and battles, the pursuing of thieves, the defense of the pecuniary interests of the family, the depositing of merchandise in theksours(store-houses). The head of the family tends the sick animals, and has the administration of the wool and grain; but practically he will not have much to do with these matters, not considering them worth his attention. But a great part of his time is taken up with keeping watch and marching, and this makes his life a rather hard one. He does not sleep at night; he waters the cattle in the pits orr’dirs; he surrounds his tents with a protecting hedge, thezirba; he struggles against the elements, which often disperse beasts, tents and men. Daily, from the cradle to the tomb, the nomad’s life is a struggle for existence. As a child he already has to look after the cattle; he learns to ride on horseback with his father. When older, whether rich or poor, he has to learn, for several years, to conduct large numbers of cattle, which is a very difficult and dangerous work, to tend the different kinds of animals, to cure them, to sell them, to derive from them as much profit as possible. Pastoral art is more complicated than at first sight it seems, and comprehends a long series of accomplishments. At twenty years the nomad is an accomplished man, thoroughly acquainted with the life he has to lead, enjoying all the physical[276]strength indispensable in the exceptionalmilieuwhere he has to struggle. The two youngest sons of the head of the family our informant describes, 15 and 13 years of age, now perform in the family the duties of herdsmen. Daily occupations of master and slaves are the driving together of the dispersed animals, the tending of the females that have calved, the preparing of special food for the young animals, the dressing of the stronger ones for the saddle and pack-saddle, and the chase of hares and gazelles65.We see that pastoral life is not so easy here as on the fertile plains of Central Asia. But the work that is most necessary here, and also most difficult, is the care for the security of the tribe and its possessions, or, as Geoffroy very appropriately expresses it, “c’est un peu toujours comme la guerre”. And this work cannot be left to slaves; else the slaves would become the masters of the tribe. Warriors are wanted here; labourers not so much.We have now accounted for the non-existence of slavery among many pastoral tribes, and the little use of slave labour among pastoral tribes in general, by the principle laid down in the last paragraph, that, generally speaking, slaves are not wanted where subsistence depends upon capital.In North-East Africa, however, there is one more cause at work, making slavery superfluous. This is the existence of a kind ofsubstitute for slavery, viz.subjection of tribes as such. Pastoral tribes often levy tributes on agricultural tribes, to which they are superior in military strength; the latter cannot easily leave the lands they cultivate and seek a new country; if not too heavily oppressed, they will prefer paying a tribute. And to pastoral nomads the levying of a tax on agricultural tribes brings far more profit than the enslaving of individuals belonging to such tribes, whom they would have to employ either in pastoral labour, which they do not want, or in tilling the soil, which work the nomads would be unable to supervise. There are also pastoral tribes subjected by other pastoral nomads, the latter forming the nobility and the military part of society. Finally we find subjected tribes of hunters, smiths,[277]etc.; here we have sometimes rather to deal with a voluntary division of labour66.The Somal have several pariah castes. Among the Wer-Singellis in North Somaliland we find the following: 1º. Midgân, smiths and traders; these, by acquiring considerable wealth, sometimes win so much regard, that even a Somali noble deigns to marry his daughter to a Midgân. 2º. Tómal, who are employed by Somali nobles as servants, herdsmen and camel-drivers, and are also obliged to go to war. The noble Wer-Singelli carries sword and spear, whereas the Tomali uses bow and arrows; sometimes a Midgân girl is given him as a wife, but never the daughter of a noble Somali. The Tómal, however, belong to the tribe. 3º. Jibbir, who are very much despised. They have no fixed habitations; they roam in families over the country, from tribe to tribe, as jugglers and magic doctors. Everybody, for fear of sorcery, gives them food and presents, and in return receives from them amulets, made of stone and roots. They contract no marriage outside their own caste67.The Massai, true warriors and raiders, “keep a subjected tribe, the Wa-rombutta, who do their hunting and what meagre agriculture they indulge in. This tribe is insignificant in appearance, and although servile and subject to the Massai are not slaves; they present almost the appearance of dwarfs.” The Wandorobo too, according to Thomson, are regarded by the Massai as a kind of serfs, and treated accordingly; and Johnston calls them a helot race of hunters and smiths68.Among the Bogos “patronage results from military subjection or from the helpless state of separate immigrants with regard to a strong and closely united nation. As the nobles carefully trace their pedigrees, it is easy to find out the Tigres. Tigre means a man of Ethiopian extraction, who speaks the Tigre language. Some Tigre families, subjected from time immemorial, have immigrated together with the family of Gebre Terke [the legendary ancestor of the Bogos]. Others already lived in[278]the country, and unable to withstand the invasion, hastened to submit in order to be tolerated. The Bogos seem to have taken possession of the country in a very pacific and forbearing way, and unlike the Normans and other European invaders, do not interfere with the regulation of landed property, so that the ancient aborigines still own most of the land. The third class is composed of foreign families who, being for some reason unable to agree with their countrymen, settle in the country of the Bogos and place themselves under their protection, which still continually occurs. A member of the Boas family [i.e.of the Bogos nobility], however poor and weak, never becomes a Tigre; his origin is a guarantee of his independence. A Tigre, however mighty and rich, cannot become a Schmagilly [noble]; for the Tigres, who are a compound of various elements, cannot trace their origin so far back as the Schmagillies who pretend to spring all from the same ancestor. Moreover, the oppression is so slight, that a revolution is unimaginable”69.Among the Takue the state of the Tigres is the same as among the Bogos; formerly they brought beer to their lords; now they pay them a small tribute of corn and fat70.Marea Tigres have a harder lot. Two kinds of obligations are incumbent on them: towards their respective masters, and towards the nobilityen bloc. Even the poorest noble never becomes a Tigre, and does not perform degrading work, such as for instance milking. The Tigre pays his master yearly 8 bottles of fat, a measure of corn, and every week a leathern bag with milk. Of every cow killed by a Tigre the master receives a considerable portion; a cow belonging to a Tigre, which dies a natural death, falls entirely to the master. As for the Tigres’ obligations towards the nobility as a whole, on several occasions they have to give up their cattle for the nobility. Among the Black Marea the Tigres own most of the land; among the Red Marea the greater part of the land is in the hands of impoverished nobles, who live chiefly upon the rent of their landed property. Another class are the Dokono, who are obliged to choose a patron and pay a tribute, but[279]are held in rather high esteem and often marry daughters of the nobles; they own land and herds and are much given to trading71.Among the Beni Amer the same distinction, of nobles and subjects, prevails. The latter are called Woréza. “We shall speak of master and servant,” says Munzinger “though the latter term does not quite answer the purpose. The state of things we are going to describe much resembles that which we have met with among the aristocrats of the Anseba; among the Beni Amer, however, the servant is a feoffee rather than a protégé. But as he derives his wealth from his master, to whom he owes what we may call interest, his state is one of much greater dependence.… Among the Beni Amer it is an ancient custom, that a lord distributes his wealth among his servants;e.g.if he receives 100 cows as his portion of the spoils of war, he does not add them to his herd, but leaves them to his servants as a present. When the servant marries, the lord presents him with a camel. In every emergency the servant applies to his lord, who helps him whenever possible. All these presents become the true property of the recipient; the servant may do with them as he likes, sell and even spend them; the lord may upbraid him for it, but legally has nothing to do with it. On the death of the servant the presents devolve upon his heirs. But the lord has a kind of usufruct of these presents; the servant provides him with fat and daily brings him a certain quantity of milk,i.e.he feeds the lord and his family. Often has the lord to wait for his supper till midnight, because the servant provides for himself first. The servant, moreover, has to provide the funeral sacrifice for his lord and for every member of the latter’s family; he leaves to the lord every sterile cow, and when he kills a beast he brings him the breast-piece. He stands by his lord in every emergency, and even assists him according to his means towards paying the tribute”. The servant is, so to speak, a tenant of his lord. As the Beni Amer are nomads, there is no land to distribute; the pasture has no owner; therefore the fief can only consist in movable property. As most of the wealth of the country is[280]in the hands of the servants, they have a decisive voice in every public council; they have to find out where the best pastures are, where the camp has to be erected72.Similar phenomena present themselves outside North-East Africa.In the second chapter of Part I we have met with subjected tribes in South Africa, such as Fengu, Makalahiri, etc., sometimes called slaves by our ethnographers73.Geoffroy speaks of settled tribes being in some way the vassals of the Larbas. Theksoursare buildings in which the nomads preserve their corn, dates and wool; these stores are guarded by settled tribes, that permanently live there and receive one tenth of the preserved stock yearly. The nomads look upon all settled tribes as degenerate beings and inferiors74. Here we have to deal with a voluntary division of labour, rather than with subjection.In Circassia, according to Bell, the serfs are prisoners of war and the ancient inhabitants of the country. The latter are perhaps the same peasants who, according to Klaproth, may not be sold apart from the land75.It is remarkable, that in Central Asia and Siberia we do not find a single instance of this subjection of tribes as such76. This is probably the reason why in these parts members of the tribe are so often employed as servants.Where nearly all work is left to subjected tribes or castes, and the nobles do nothing but fight, there is not much use for slave labour. The nobles do not want slaves, because all work required by them is performed by their subjects.We have now found a new cause, from which in some cases slaves are not wanted: the subjection of tribes as such, which serves as a substitute for slavery.[Contents]§ 2.Slavery among pastoral tribes.Yet several pastoral tribes keep slaves; this has still to be[281]accounted for. We shall inquire first, whether thesecondary causeswe have found in the last paragraph are at work here.1º.Condition of women.On the Pacific Coast of North America the men sometimes procure slaves, in order to relieve the women of a part of their task. There are some details on record suggestive of the same state of things among some pastoral tribes. Among the Circassians, Bahima and Beduan (pastoral tribes), Waganda, pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu, Ossetes and Gallas (agricultural tribes depending largely on cattle for their subsistence), slaves are employed for household work. The same is the case with female slaves among the Larbas and Somal of the towns. Munzinger states that only few Beduan are rich enough to keep a female slave or a maid-servant; therefore in most families the preparing of food falls to the share of the wife, this being almost her only occupation77. Hence we may infer that among the Beduan, and probably among some other tribes, slaves are procured by the men for the benefit of the women.2º.Preserving of food.This does not seem to require much labour among pastoral tribes. On the Pacific Coast of North America the fish have to be prepared for winter use. But where men live upon the products of their cattle, food is not at one time much more abundant than at another.3º.Trade and industry.Household work, sometimes performed by slaves, does not seem to serve the purposes of trade, as on the Pacific Coast; there is not a single detail on record, that would lead us to suppose that it does. We even find particulars tending to prove the contrary. Among the Beni Amer, who have many slaves, the women are continually occupied in making mats, the proceeds of which labour are often sufficient to pay the tribute to the Turks78. Slaves do not seem to join in this occupation.Among the Larbas free women manufacture tissues, which are sold abroad79. Probably slaves are not capable of performing such fine work.Among the Yorubas and pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu[282]the slaves are occupied in trading. But these tribes are not nomadic; moreover, these slaves do not, like the slaves on the Pacific Coast, prepare the articles of commerce, but are themselves the traders, which is quite another thing.4º.Slaves wanted as warriors.Slaves sometimes serve to augment the military strength of the community. From the survey of the work done by slaves, given in the beginning of this chapter, it appears that they are often employed in warfare, viz. among the nomadic Somal and Danakil, Kafirs, pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu, Mandingoes and Yorubas; probably also among the Bogos, where they generally take to robbery. Circassian slaves cannot be compelled to go to war80. Hence it seems to follow that they may go if they like. Among the Beni Amer native-born slaves are avenged by their own relatives; so these slaves are armed, and probably fight together with their masters.The ensuing statement strikingly shows how highly slaves are valued as warriors among the nomadic Somal and Danakil. If a slave kills one enemy, he becomes free; if two or more, he is entitled to being adopted. Having killed ten enemies, he becomes a person of rank and enjoys many privileges81.In these cases slaves strengthen the military force of the tribe. But the tribe profits only indirectly by this reinforcement of the family. Most pastoral nomads live in comparatively small groups, rather independently; there is no strong central government82. And where quarrels between these small groups are frequent, the more numerous the family (in the wider sense, the Romanfamilia, including slaves), the better will the head of the family be able to maintain his position83. And pastoral nomads have always a great motive for fighting: they can enrich themselves by a successful raid. Among hunting, fishing, and agricultural tribes, if the conqueror does not want to keep the vanquished as slaves, war gives little profit84. But[283]in the raids pastoral nomads make on each other, the successful raider may acquire numerous herds,i.e.great wealth. Therefore it is of the utmost importance for a man to have as numerous afamiliaas possible.When speaking of the Larbas, we have seen that their mode of life isun peu toujours comme la guerre. Their describer states: “Theft is the most threatening evil the nomad has to deal with; he is therefore most severe in suppressing it, the punishment being invariably death.” He also speaks of free servants, members of the family, who live under the protection and at the expense of some rich head of a family; they are generally very numerous, and form a body of clients that strengthens their patron’s power85.Levchine, speaking of the Kazak Kirghiz, says: “Their feuds are caused by the unrestrained desire for plunder, that ruins and entirely demoralizes them; this plundering is calledbaranta, Thesebarantasconsist in reciprocal cattle-stealing, from which often sanguinary combats result.… And we must not think that public hatred or contempt falls on those who are addicted to these horrible excesses; on the contrary, they enjoy a reputation for bravery, and are distinguished by the name ofBatyrorBoghatyr, which name spreads through all the hordes the fame of their exploits. Many of these braves, calledBatyrfor their plundering ardour, though many years dead, still live in the remembrance of their countrymen, and their names are celebrated.” Accordingly, one of the qualities required in a chief is a large family, that gives him the power to maintain his authority86.Among the Beni Amer, where it seems to be quite an ordinary thing for a noble to receive 100 cows as his portion of the spoils of war, it is a great support for a man to have many children, as in these countries family is opposed to family87.A writer of the 18thcentury tells us that “the Chukchi who live to the north of the river Anadir, are not subjected to the Russian empire, and often make raids on those brought under Russian control, on the Koryakes as well as on the Chukchi,[284]killing or making prisoners all they meet, and carrying off their herds of reindeer”88.Among the Somal and Gallas internal wars are very frequent; among the former most wars are marauding expeditions. And here too the possession of wife and children is indispensable; an unmarried man cannot attain to wealth and power89.Among the Ama-Xosa and Ovaherero the chief object of warfare is cattle-stealing. Fugitives from other tribes are never delivered up by the Ama-Xosa, whatever the reason of their flight; for they strengthen the chief’s power. Another fact, showing the great importance they attach to the numerical strength of their tribe, is this, that he who kills a man or womanbyaccident has to pay a fine to the chief, as a compensation for the loss sufferedbythe government of the tribe90.We have already seen that the Massai are “true warriors and raiders” and that the Mairs and Meenas spend their time in “marauding, plundering and murdering”91.We see that among these tribes everybody is desirous of having as many people about him as possible for the protection of his own property and the capturing of his neighbour’s. And a convenient means of procuring such people is the purchase of slaves.There is one more secondary cause here, which we have not met with before. It is sometimes stated that keeping slaves is a mereluxury. Now rich nomads, like all rich people, love luxury. Like the rich Kazak Kirghiz who told Levchine that the possession of over 8000 horses procured him a reputation among his countrymen, many rich nomads will win renown by possessing a large retinue of slaves. Thus for instance we know that among the Beni Amer slave labour is of little use; yet it is stated, that the Beni Amer are ambitious to possess many slaves92. And slaves are preferable, as objects of luxury, to free servants. For slaves, generally acquired from beyond the limits of the tribe, are much more apt to gratify the pride of the rich man by their submission, than poor freemen,[285]who are always conscious of theirmembershipof the tribe and unwilling to be trampled down. The latter fact is proved by several statements of ethnographers.If a rich Samoyede refuses to give his poor countryman a reindeer for food, the latter has the right to carry off one or more from the rich man’s herd; the law does not give the owner any hold upon him93.Among the Yakuts, according to Müller, the rich sustain their poor fellow-tribesmen; if the latter lose their reindeer, they are indemnified by the rich. Another writer tells us that the poor, when dying of hunger, refrain from slaughtering an animal, from fear of losing their independence94.Similarly among the Ostyaks “members of the same tribe, whether large or small, consider themselves as relations, even where the common ancestor is unknown, and where the evidence of consanguinity is wholly wanting. Nevertheless, the feeling of consanguinity, sometimes real, sometimes conventional, is the fundamental principle of the union. The rich, of which there are few, help the poor, who are many. There is not much that can change hands. The little, however, that is wanted by the needy is taken as a right rather than a favour”95.The Altaians are very sensitive about their liberty. “Every poor man who joins a rich family considers himself a member of it. He will perish of hunger, rather than comply with a demand of his rich neighbour made in a commanding tone”96.Licata tells us that hungry Danakil go to their chief and say: “I am hungry, give me something to eat”97.Among the Larbas free labourers “work for one more fortunate than themselves, but not for a superior; for notwithstanding the relation of employer and employed, equality prevails”98.It is easy to understand that slaves are preferred to such servants. Only in one case is this preference mentioned by an ethnographer. Munzinger states that the slaves bought by the rich Beduan for household work are generally more trusted[286]than ordinary servants, as they are riveted to their position99. But we may safely suppose that in other cases also this circumstance has furthered the growth of slavery.We have explained why pastoral tribes have no great use for slave labour. We have also mentioned some motives that may induce such tribes to keep slaves. But the fact has not yet been accounted for, that some pastoral tribes keep slaves and others do not. Whence this difference? It has been shown that slavery does not only exist among pastoral tribes that till the soil to a limited extent. Among all pastoral tribes subsistence is dependent on capital. Wealth, too, exists among all these tribes100; and we cannot see why slaves, as a luxury, would be wanted by one such tribe more than by another. As slaves are sometimes employed as warriors, we might be inclined to suppose that slavery exists among all warlike tribes, and among these only. But there are several pastoral tribes which, though very warlike, do not keep slaves: Kazak Kirghiz, Turkomans, Massai, and some pastoral nomads of South Africa.That the subjection of tribes as such in stead of individual slaves, of which we have spoken in the last paragraph, cannot account for all cases in which slavery does not exist, becomes evident, if we take into consideration that most of the pastoral tribes of North-East Africa, which keep other tribes in subjection, practise slavery, whereas in Central Asia and Siberia we find neither subjected tribes nor slaves.Therefore there must be other causes.In chapter II we have spoken ofexternal causes: it may be that slaves would be of great use, and yet cannot be kept, because the coercive power of the tribe is not strong enough. We have also seen that this coercive power is most strongly developed where men have fixed habitations, live in rather large groups and preserve food for the time of scarcity, and where there is a group of somewhat homogeneous tribes maintaining, constant relations with each other. Pastoral tribes are nomadic,[287]do not live together in very large groups, and do not want to preserve food, for they have their supply of food always at hand. Yet the fact that several pastoral tribes keep slaves proves that at least among these the coercive power is strong enough. We shall try to find a cause peculiar to these tribes, that enables them to keep slaves. Now it is remarkable that our positive cases are nearly all of them found in a few definite parts of the globe: North-East Africa, the Caucasus, and Arabia; whereas the pastoral nomads of Siberia, Central Asia, India, and South Africa, with one exception (the Ovaherero), do not keep slaves. And the parts where slavery exists are exactly those where the slave-trade has for a long time been carried on on a large scale. Accordingly, the slaves these tribes keep are often purchased from slave-traders and in several cases belong to inferior races.The slaves of the Aeneze Bedouins are Negroes101.The slaves kept by the Larbas are Negroes purchased from slave-trading caravans102.Although we find no description of slave-trade among the Circassians, slaves in the Caucasus are exported on a large scale103.Most slaves found among the Somal and Danakil are articles of transit trade: they are purchased from interior tribes and intended to be sold to Arabians. A Somali never becomes the slave of a Somali, and prisoners of war are not enslaved104.Many Beduan make it their business to steal slaves, whom they sell in Massowah105.The slaves kept by the Beni Amer are either captured from enemies or purchased abroad; a Beni Amer never loses his freedom. Slaves are not, however, often sold abroad106.On the other hand, the pastoral tribes of Central Asia and Siberia live in secluded parts, far from the centres of the slave-trade.The slave-trade greatly facilitates the keeping of slaves. Where slaves are brought by slave-dealers from remote parts, it is much easier to keep them than where they have to be[288]captured from enemies,i.e.from the neighbours; in the latter case the slaves are very likely to run away and return to their native country; but a purchased slave transported from a great distance cannot so easily return; if he succeeded in escaping, he would be instantly recaptured by one of the foreign tribes whose countries he would have to traverse. Moreover, some tribes may, by their intercourse with slave-traders, have become familiar with the idea of slavery, and so the slave-trade may have suggested to them the keeping of slaves for their own use.There is another circumstance, which may partially account for the existence of slavery among some of these tribes: the slaves are often Negroes. And Negroes have always and everywhere been enslaved; they seem to be more fit for slaves than most races of mankind. Galton, speaking of the Damaras, says: “These savages court slavery. You engage one of them as a servant, and you find that he considers himself your property, and that you are, in fact, become the owner of a slave. They have no independence about them, generally speaking, but follow a master as spaniels would. Their hero-worship is directed to people who have wit and strength enough to ill-use them. Revenge is a very transient passion in their character, it gives way to admiration of the oppressor. The Damaras seem to me to love nothing; the only strong feelings they possess, which are not utterly gross and sensual, are those of admiration and fear. They seem to be made for slavery, and naturally fall into its ways”107. And Hutter, describing the Bali tribes of Cameroon, remarks that the Negro wants to be ruled and patiently endures any amount of oppression108. Similar descriptions may undoubtedly be given of many other Negro tribes. Moreover several slave-keeping nomadic tribes are Semites and Hamites, and therefore look upon the Negroes as an inferior race. Now, where slaves are procured mainly for military purposes (and we have seen that this is often the case with pastoral tribes), an absorption of foreigners into the tribe would answer the purpose as well as, and perhaps better than, slavery. But where the foreigners belong to inferior races, the members of the tribe[289]are not likely to intermarry with them and look upon them as their equals; they remain slaves, though they are not of great use as such. We must also take into consideration that inferior races are not so much to be dreaded as superior peoples; the latter, if individuals belonging to them were kept as slaves, might retaliate upon the slave-owners. This may have been the reason why the Kazak Kirghiz who, in Levchine’s time, kidnapped many Russians, always sold them abroad: it would not have been safe to keep them as slaves. Accordingly, Pallas states that in his time they used to kidnap men on the Russian frontiers towards the time when they were going to remove with their herds, so that they could not be pursued109.In the second chapter of this Part we have remarked that the growth of slavery is furthered by the existence of a group of more or less similar tribes, the slave-trade being in such cases the means of spreading slavery over the group. We may say now that, whether such a group exists or not, the slave-trade facilitates the keeping of slaves. When the coercive power of a tribe is not strong enough for the keeping of prisoners as slaves, the slave-trade may enable such a tribe to keep slaves; for the keeping of purchased slaves, brought from a great distance, does not require so much coercive power.We see that the difference between the slave-keeping and the other pastoral tribes consists in external circumstances. Pastoral tribes have no strong motives for making slaves, for the use of slave labour is small. On the other hand, there are no causes absolutely preventing them from keeping slaves. These tribes are, so to speak, in a state of equilibrium; a small additional cause on either side turns the balance. One such additional cause is the slave-trade; another is the neighbourhood of inferior races. There may be other small additional causes, peculiar to single tribes. We shall not inquire whether there are, but content ourselves with the foregoing conclusions, of which the principal are these, that the taming of animals does not naturally lead to the taming of men, and that the relation between capital and labour among pastoral tribes renders the economic use of slavery very small.[290]Recapitulating, we may remark that our general theory, that there is no great use for slave labour where subsistence depends on capital, is fully verified by our investigation of economic life among pastoral tribes.Two secondary internal causes found in the second chapter have been also met with among pastoral tribes: slaves are sometimes employed in warfare, and sometimes for domestic labour to relieve the women of their task. Two new secondary factors have been found in this chapter: slaves are kept as a luxury; and sometimes the subjection of tribes as such, serving as a substitute for slavery, makes slavery proper superfluous.With regard to the external causes it has been shown that the coercive power of pastoral tribes is not very strong, as they are nomadic and live in rather small groups; but this want is sometimes compensated for by the slave-trade and the neighbourhood of inferior races. The two latter circumstances may therefore rank as new external causes, the slave-trade taking the place of the existence of a homogeneous group. On the Pacific Coast of N. America it is the trade between tribes of the same culture, among pastoral nomads it is the trade with Arabia, etc.; but in either case it is the slave-trade that furthers the growth of slavery.Recapitulation of the causes we have found up to the present.Furthering the growth of slavery.Hindering the growth of slavery.I. Internal causes.A.General.1º. Subsistence easily acquired and not dependent on capital.1º. Subsistence dependent on capital.2º. Subsistence not dependent on capital, but difficult to procure.[291]B.Secondary economic:1º. Preserving of food.1º. Female labour making slave labour superfluous.2º. Trade and industry.3º. A high position of women.2º. Subjection of tribes as such.C.Secondary non-economic:1º. Slaves wanted for military purposes.1º. Militarism making slavery impossible.2º. Slaves kept as a luxury.II. External causes:1º. Fixed habitations.2º. Living in large groups.3º. Preserving of food110.4º. The slave-trade.5º. The neighbourhood of inferior races.[292]

CHAPTER III.PASTORAL TRIBES.

[Contents]§ 1.Capital and labour among pastoral tribes.The number of these tribes is not large, as they are found in a few parts of the world only. Moreover, the descriptions available to us were in many cases too incomplete to justify any inference as to their having or not having slaves.The clear cases noticed by us are the following.Positive cases.Arabia:Aeneze Bedouins,Larbas.2Caucasus:Circassians,Kabards.2Bantu tribes:Ovaherero,Bahima.2Hamitic group:Beduan,Beni Amer,Somal,Danakil.410Negative cases.India:Todas.1Central Asia:Kazak Kirghiz,Altaians,Turkomans.3Siberia:Samoyedes,Tunguz,Yakuts,nomadic Koryakes.4[263]Bantu tribes:Ama-Xosa,Ama-Zulu,some divisions of the Mundombe.3Hamatic group:Massai.112We see that there are almost as many positive as negative cases. So those theorists are wrong, who hold that the taming of animals naturally leads to the taming of men1.It might, however, be that the non-existence of slavery in our negative cases were due to a special, external cause, viz. that these tribes were so inclosed between more powerful nations as not to be able to procure slaves, though slaves would be of much use to them. A brief survey of the political state of these tribes shows that they are not all in this position. The Kazak Kirghiz, in Levchine’s time, kidnapped slaves whom they sold abroad. The Massai are very warlike and adopt captives. The Turkomans are “the intermediate agents for carrying on the slave-trade”2. The Ama-Xosa and Ama-Zulu are also very warlike3. We see that there are some pastoral tribes that, though able to procure slaves, do not keep any. The non-existence of slavery among them must be due to other, more internal, causes.It might also be that our positive cases were exceptions to a general rule. For many pastoral tribes, though subsisting mainly by cattle-breeding, carry on agriculture besides. If these only kept slaves, and employed them chiefly in work connected with agriculture, slavery would prove foreign to pastoral nomadism as such; for then these tribes would only keep slaves in their quality as agriculturists.We shall inquire whether this be so; and for this purpose we shall give a survey of the work imposed upon slaves among pastoral tribes. This survey, besides enabling us to decide upon the question at issue, will show what place slavery occupies in pastoral life.Among the Larbas the boys (also free boys) guard the cattle[264]on the pasture-ground, whereas the work that requires more skill (the tending of young animals, the breaking of horses, etc.) is equally divided between master and slaves4.Circassian slaves, according to Bell, till the soil, tend the cattle and perform domestic labour. Klaproth, however, states that the peasants may only be sold together with the land; so they are rather a kind of serfs. Domestic slaves may be sold separately5.According to Roscoe, among the Bahima, “the women’s duties are to wash the milk pots, perhaps it would be better to say see the pots are washed, because the work generally falls upon the slaves to perform”6.Munzinger speaks of domestic labour being imposed on slaves by the Beduan. Most of these slaves are women7.Among the Beni Amer it is considered an honour to have many slaves. “Properly speaking slaves serve their master only when children. Adult female slaves are concubines, live with their master, but are exempt from nearly all labour; adult male slaves generally despise all work, and belong to the retinue of the master. The master derives no real profit from his slaves.” According to Von Müller the fabrication of tar falls to the share of the slave, such work being below the dignity of a freeman8.Paulitschke tells us that among the nomadic Somal and Danakil slavery is not profitable; for the territories inhabited by them are thinly peopled, agriculture is insignificant, and these cattle-breeders get their subsistence rather easily; moreover they would be unable to support a considerable number of slaves by the produce of their cattle. Therefore among the Danakil on the river Aussa and the Rahanwîn Somal on the lower Wêbi-Schabêli, where slaves are employed in agriculture, there is more use for slave labour. Among the nomadic Somal and Danakil slaves appear also to be employed in warfare. According to Bottego, whose account applies to the Somal of the towns, adult male slaves till the soil, build houses, and perform the rudest and most fatiguing kinds of work. The[265]boys lead the cattle to the pasture-ground; the women are employed in household work and often are concubines of their masters9.There are some tribes that subsist mainly on agriculture, but also, to a great extent, on cattle-breeding. It may be of some use to give a survey of the work done by slaves, among them too; it will appear, then, whether they keep their slaves for agricultural purposes only, or employ them also for pastoral work.Among the Kafirs some slaves are blacksmiths. In war a slave boy beats the drum10. Our informant speaks only incidentally of slave labour; he does not mean to say that this is the only work performed by slaves.Among the Barotse young slaves are given as pages to the children of freemen. Slaves till the soil and tend the cattle; slave boys are employed as herdsmen11.In a description of the Waganda it is said: “One of the principal evils resulting from slavery in Uganda is that it causes all manual labour to be looked upon as derogatory to the dignity of a free man”12.Among the Mandingoes native-born slaves enjoy much liberty; they tend the cattle, and go to war, even without their masters. Freemen work as much as slaves. Every Mandingo, to whatever class he belongs, is occupied in agriculture. The tending of horses is incumbent on slave boys13.Hildebrandt states that the occupations of the Sakalavas are not many. In North Sakalavaland, however, rice is cultivated for export, and so there is more labour wanted here; therefore in this district slavery prevails to a large extent14.Among the Bogos there are hardly 200 slaves (whereas Munzinger estimates the total population at 8400). Slaves are of little use to their owners. Male slaves live separately and generally take to robbery. Female slaves, having no opportunity to marry, become prostitutes and live rather independently15.[266]The Takue have very few slaves. In their laws and customs they show a close resemblance to the Bogos16.Among the pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu agriculture is incumbent on slaves. The slaves also share in their masters’ slave-raids. Jansen gives some more details about the work of slaves in the Sulu Islands. The ordinary occupations of slaves are agriculture, fishing, manufacture of salt, trade, and domestic work17.The slaves of the Geges and Nagos of Porto Novo are chiefly employed in agriculture18.Among the Ossetes the slaves perform household work; the peasants are serfs19.The slaves captured and purchased by the Gallas are generally sold to foreign traders; in large households they are sometimes retained and employed in various kinds of work. In another place our informant states that most slaves are employed in agriculture20.Yoruba slaves are employed in trade and warfare21.We see that slaves are employed in agriculture among the agricultural Somal and Danakil, Fulbe, Barotse, Mandingoes, Sakalavas, pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu, Geges and Nagos, Gallas; and very probably also among the Waganda, where they perform “all manual labour.” As the details given by our ethnographers are not always complete, it is possible that in some more cases slaves are employed in agriculture. But it is sufficiently clear, that among the Beni Amer, nomadic Somal and Danakil, Bogos, and probably also among the Beduan and Takue, slaves do not till the soil. Among the Ossetes and Circassians the peasants are serfs, slaves being employed in household work. What work is incumbent on slaves among the Aeneze Bedouins we are not told; but agriculture seems to be unknown among them. Among the Larbas the daily work is equally divided between master and slaves, agriculture holding a very subordinate place. Hence it appears that several of these tribes keep slaves, though they do not[267]employ them in agriculture; pastoral tribes, as such, sometimes keep slaves.But another inference we can draw from the foregoing survey of slave labour is this. Where slaves are not employed in agriculture or in such other work as requires a settled life (e.g.house-building among the Somal of the towns, fishing and manufacture of salt among the pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu), the use of slave labour is not great. Among the Beni Amer, Bogos, and nomadic Somal and Danakil slave-keeping is stated to be a mere luxury. The Sakalavas, except in the rice-exporting district, do not want much slave labour. And only in one case, viz. among the Larbas, is it clearly stated that the chief business of slaves is pastoral work.This tends to prove, thatamong true pastoral tribes slavery, as a system of labour, is of little moment. This inference is verified by several statements about slaves being often manumitted or in the course of time becoming practically free.Burckhardt, speaking of the slaves of the Aeneze Bedouins, says: “After a certain lapse of time they are always emancipated, and married to persons of their own colour”22.Among the Circassians slaves are often manumitted. A slave can also purchase his freedom, and then becomes a member of a Circassian fraternity23.The Beni Amer have two kinds of slaves, newly-purchased and native-born. “Their condition differs so much, that only the former may properly be called slaves; the latter are rather serfs. The newly-purchased slave is treated like every Mohammedan slave, he may be sold and does not yet belong to the family. The native-born slave has only the name, not the state of a slave; this appears from his being allowed to intermarry with the Woreza (subjected class). The children born of such a marriage are considered free, as they descend from a free mother. In Barka the Kishendoa,i.e.native-born slaves, who inhabit a camp of tents of their own, are governed by a chief who is one of their own number, and intermarry with the Woreza. Native-born slaves may live where they like and have the same right of inheritance as freemen; only if such[268]a slave leaves no relatives does the master succeed to his goods.… In the blood-feud too the native-born slave is in a peculiar condition. If a newly-purchased slave is killed, his price is restored to his owner; for such a slave is looked upon as an article of trade. The native-born slave, however, belongs to the family; therefore his blood requires blood; he is avenged by his relatives if there are such, and otherwise by his master; if this is not practicable because the murderer is a man of power, the matter is hushed up; but a compensation is never given”24.The Somal often buy slaves whom they manumit soon afterwards25.Among the Kafirs of India each tribe is governed by a council. Even slaves can be elected as members of this council26.Our survey of the work done by slaves shows in the third place, that slaves are often employed in warfare. This will be accounted for later on.Here we have only to emphasize the fact, that to pastoral tribes as such slave labour is of little use. This makes it easy to understand why so many of them dispense with slavery altogether.Going on to inquire what is the cause of this phenomenon, we may remember the general conclusion we have arrived at in the last paragraph, viz. that slave labour is of little use, where subsistence is either dependent on capital, or very difficult to procure. Now it is easy to see that among pastoral tribes subsistence entirely depends on capital. Among people who live upon the produce of their cattle, a man who owns no cattle,i.e.no capital, has no means of subsistence. Accordingly, among pastoral tribes we find rich and poor men; and the poor often offer themselves as labourers to the rich27.Among the Syrian Bedouins “to every tent, or to every two or three tents, there is a shepherd or person to attend the cattle, either a younger son or servant; he receives wages for ten months”28.[269]Among the Larbas alms are given to the poor. The social rank of the head of a family depends on the number of his children, his practical knowledge of the pastoral art, and his wealth. There are free labourers who are paid in kind. Herdsmen have the usufruct of a part of the herds they tend. Generally the labourer takes a tenth in kind at the close of the time agreed upon; moreover he receives his daily food during the time of his engagement29.Levchine, speaking of the Kazak Kirghiz, tells us: “Once I asked a Kirghiz, owner of 8000 horses, why he did not sell every year a part of his stud. He answered: “Why should I sell that which is my pleasure? I want no money; if I had any, I should be obliged to shut it up in a box, where nobody would see it; but when my steeds run over the steppe everybody looks at them; everybody knows that they are mine; and people always remember that I am rich.” In this manner is the reputation of being a rich man acquired throughout the hordes; such is the wealth that procures them the regard of their countrymen and the title ofbaï(rich man), which sometimes gives them an ascendency over the offspring of the khans and the most deserving old men.” On the other hand the number of beggars is very considerable. Levchine makes no mention of servants; but Radloff, who about thirty years later visited the Kazak Kirghiz, says: “There exists here a class of servants, whom I found in every well-to-do family. The herds are generally tended by hired herdsmen, who are subjected to a kind of supervision.” The rich also engage poor families to till their lands. A man who loses all his cattle has no resource left but to offer himself as a labourer30.The same first-rate ethnographer informs us that among the Altaians “rich and poor eat the same kind of food; the difference is only in the size of the kettle and the quantity of food. The poor man eats what he has got, which most frequently is very little; and he would starve but that the rich have such an abundance of food, that in summer they readily entertain whoever comes to theirjurts(tents).” When a beast[270]is being killed, the poor neighbours in large numbers throng towards the place and try to secure those portions of the bowels that the rich disdain; they have to fight for them with the dogs, who are equally fond of the delicacies. When all guests have been served, pieces of meat are thrown towards the door, where poor men and dogs try to secure them. The picked bones are also thrown to the poor, who clean them so thoroughly that nothing but the bare bone is left to the dogs. The cattle of the rich are generally tended by poor neighbours, who live in the vicinity of the rich, partake of their food, and receive their worn clothes. Young girls often seek employment as servants; orphans of poor men also serve the rich31.Among the Kalmucks there are poor people who serve the rich as herdsmen32.Prschewalsky states that rich Mongols, who own thousands of beasts, employ herdsmen who are poor and have no relations33.The Kurds of Eriwan employ freemen as herdsmen34.Among the Tunguz the poor generally serve the rich, by whom they are badly treated35.Yakuts, who have less than one head of cattle per soul, must hire themselves out for wages36.Pallas says: “Every Samoyede has his reindeer and tends them himself with the help of his family, except the very rich who employ poor men as herdsmen.” Von Stenin also states that the poor serve the rich. The following anecdote, given by this writer, shows how strongly the desire of wealth influences psychical life among the Samoyedes. One of them depicted the delight of intoxication in these terms: “Spirits taste better than meat. When a man is drunk, he fancies he has many reindeer and thinks himself a merchant. But on coming to his senses he sees that he is poor and has just spent his last reindeer in drinking”37.Of the Koryakes we are told: “Before they were subjected[271]by the Russians, they had neither government nor magistrates; only the rich exercised some authority over the poor.” Their greatest pleasure consists in looking at their herds. The poor are employed in tending the herds of the rich for food and clothing; if they have themselves some reindeer, they are allowed to join them to their master’s herds and tend them together with the latter38.Among the Tuski, according to Georgi, the poor serve the rich as herdsmen39.In North-East Africa the state of things is not quite the same. The pastoral nomads here form the nobility, and tax subjected tribes with tributes and compulsory labour. Servants are not found here so often as in Asia. Sometimes, however, they are found. Thus among the Beni Amer there are herdsmen, maid-servants etc. who work for wages40. The same, perhaps, applies to the Massai, where the man who owns large herds and many wives, enjoys high consideration but a poor man is despised41.“Among all South African natives” says Fritsch “the rich tyrannize over the poor who, in the hope of filling their stomachs, comply with a state of dependence that is not authorized by law”42.Among the Caffres poor men place themselves under the protection of a rich head of a family, build their huts in his kraal, and in reward yield their cattle to him43.Kropf tells us that among the Ama-Xosa the consideration a man enjoys depends on the number of cattle he owns. The poor are fed by the chief and in return render him services44.The Ovaherero despise any one who has no cattle. The rich support many people, who become their dependents, and so they acquire distinction and power45. The children of impoverished families who, according to Andersson46, are kept as slaves, are perhaps rather to be called servants.Among those tribes which are mainly agricultural, but besides[272]subsist largely upon the produce of their cattle, similar phenomena present themselves.Among the Ossetes freemen are often employed as servants47.Among the Bechuanas the possession of cattle and a waggon is a mark of distinction. They mix their porridge with curdled milk, and therefore call a poor man a water-porridge man48.Casalis gives an elaborate description of the value which the Basutos attach to the possession of cattle. Wealth, among them, consists in cattle, and this wealth is the base of the power of the chiefs. By means of the produce of their herds they feed the poor, procure arms for the warriors, support the troops in war and entertain good relations with neighbouring nations. Were a chief to lose his cattle, his power would be at an end49.The Barotse employ as herdsmen young slaves and sons of poor men50.Among the Dinka every man upon an average owns three head of cattle; but there are also poor men, who are the slaves or servants of the rich51. We may safely infer that these “slaves or servants” are servants and not slaves.The sheikh of each Chillook tribe, according to Chaillé Long, detains as slaves those who do not own even a single cow52. Probably the same state of things prevails here as among the Caffres: these poor men are not slaves, but compelled by hunger to seek the protection of a rich man.In the country of the Gallas the value of labour is very small53.The Bogos employ freemen as herdsmen and peasants; they also keep maid-servants54.Among the Amahlubi there are herdsmen, who serve for wages55.We see that, wherever men subsist by cattle-breeding, a peculiar characteristic of economic life presents itself. This characteristic is not the existence of wealth; for wealth also exists among the tribes of the Pacific Coast of North America; yet on the Pacific Coast slave labour is of great use. It is the[273]existence of poverty. On the Pacific Coast the “abundant natural supplies in ocean, stream, and forest” enable each man, be he rich or not, to provide for himself; but among pastoral tribes the means of subsistence are the property of individuals; and those who own no cattle have no resource but to apply to the owners for support56. Therefore, if labourers are wanted, there are always freemen who readily offer their services; and there is no great use for slave labour57.So there is always a supply of labour. On the other hand, the demand for labour is small. There is but little work to be done. Among some pastoral tribes the men spend a great deal of time in idleness58.Prschewalsky, speaking of the Mongols, remarks: “Unlimited laziness is a main characteristic of the nomads; they spend their whole life in idleness, which is furthered by the character of pastoral nomadism. The tending of the cattle is the sole occupation of the Mongol, and this does not nearly require all his time. The guarding of cows and sheep is the business of the women and grown-up children; milking, creaming, butter-making and other domestic labour falls almost entirely to the share of the mistress of the house. The men generally do nothing, and from morning till night ride from onejurt(tent) to another, drinkingkoumissand chattering with their neighbours. The chase, which the nomads are passionately fond of, serves mainly as a pastime.”The Altaians have to survey the cattle; this consists only in riding a few times a day to the herds, and driving them together. The milking of the mares during the summer, which requires some courage, is also the men’s business.Among the Aeneze Bedouins the men’s sole business is feeding the horses, and in the evening milking the camels59.[274]The Kazak Kirghiz, too, are very lazy. They pass a great part of the summer sleeping because of the warmth; and in winter-time they hardly ever leave their tents, because the snow covers the roads. As they are not acquainted with any arts, and the tending of the cattle is their only occupation, there is no need for much work60.Rowney tells us of the Mairs and Meenas of Rajpootana: “The ostensible occupation followed by them was that of goatherds; but the herds were usually left to the charge of their boys and old men, while the more able-bodied spent their time, mounted on their ponies, in marauding, plundering, and murdering”61.Among the Massai the men despise every kind of work. Only warfare is considered an occupation worthy of a man62.It has to be remarked that most of these tribes do not keep slaves; so it is not by imposing all the work upon slaves that the men are enabled to pass their time in idleness; yet they do almost nothing. “The herdsman is lazy,” says Schmoller63, and Schurtz speaks of the aversion from all hard and regular work, which characterizes the pastoral nomads64. This proves that but little labour is wanted. One might object, that perhaps women and boys are overworked. But the fact that the able-bodied men, who form a considerable part of the community, can afford to take life so very easily, sufficiently proves that the total amount of labour required is rather small.Here we find one more reason why pastoral tribes have little use for slave labour. The demand for labour is small; therefore, even if free labourers were not available, only a few slaves would be wanted. Capital is here the principal factor of production, labour holding a subordinate place. Among agricultural tribes, when there is a practically unlimited supply of fertile soil, every person whose labour is available to the tribe can cultivate a piece of ground, and so, the more people there are, the more food can be produced. But among pastoral tribes, as soon as there are people enough within the tribe to guard the cattle, milk the cows, and do the other[275]work required, an increase in the number of labourers is not profitable. There is only a limited demand for labour; therefore, though there may be a temporary scarcity of labour which makes strengthening of the labour forces of the tribe by means of slaves desirable,—when a few slaves have been procured, the point at which a further increase in the number of people gives no profit will soon be reached again.We see that among pastoral tribes little labour is required; and such as is, is easy to procure; for there are always people destitute of capital, who offer themselves as labourers. Therefore slaves are economically of little use.There is, however, one description of a pastoral tribe, in which it is stated, that men as well as women have to work very hard. This is Geoffroy’s capital monography on the Larbas. The head of the family and his sons have to guard the herds, trace and dig pits, share in all operations common to the horsemen of the tribe: raids and battles, the pursuing of thieves, the defense of the pecuniary interests of the family, the depositing of merchandise in theksours(store-houses). The head of the family tends the sick animals, and has the administration of the wool and grain; but practically he will not have much to do with these matters, not considering them worth his attention. But a great part of his time is taken up with keeping watch and marching, and this makes his life a rather hard one. He does not sleep at night; he waters the cattle in the pits orr’dirs; he surrounds his tents with a protecting hedge, thezirba; he struggles against the elements, which often disperse beasts, tents and men. Daily, from the cradle to the tomb, the nomad’s life is a struggle for existence. As a child he already has to look after the cattle; he learns to ride on horseback with his father. When older, whether rich or poor, he has to learn, for several years, to conduct large numbers of cattle, which is a very difficult and dangerous work, to tend the different kinds of animals, to cure them, to sell them, to derive from them as much profit as possible. Pastoral art is more complicated than at first sight it seems, and comprehends a long series of accomplishments. At twenty years the nomad is an accomplished man, thoroughly acquainted with the life he has to lead, enjoying all the physical[276]strength indispensable in the exceptionalmilieuwhere he has to struggle. The two youngest sons of the head of the family our informant describes, 15 and 13 years of age, now perform in the family the duties of herdsmen. Daily occupations of master and slaves are the driving together of the dispersed animals, the tending of the females that have calved, the preparing of special food for the young animals, the dressing of the stronger ones for the saddle and pack-saddle, and the chase of hares and gazelles65.We see that pastoral life is not so easy here as on the fertile plains of Central Asia. But the work that is most necessary here, and also most difficult, is the care for the security of the tribe and its possessions, or, as Geoffroy very appropriately expresses it, “c’est un peu toujours comme la guerre”. And this work cannot be left to slaves; else the slaves would become the masters of the tribe. Warriors are wanted here; labourers not so much.We have now accounted for the non-existence of slavery among many pastoral tribes, and the little use of slave labour among pastoral tribes in general, by the principle laid down in the last paragraph, that, generally speaking, slaves are not wanted where subsistence depends upon capital.In North-East Africa, however, there is one more cause at work, making slavery superfluous. This is the existence of a kind ofsubstitute for slavery, viz.subjection of tribes as such. Pastoral tribes often levy tributes on agricultural tribes, to which they are superior in military strength; the latter cannot easily leave the lands they cultivate and seek a new country; if not too heavily oppressed, they will prefer paying a tribute. And to pastoral nomads the levying of a tax on agricultural tribes brings far more profit than the enslaving of individuals belonging to such tribes, whom they would have to employ either in pastoral labour, which they do not want, or in tilling the soil, which work the nomads would be unable to supervise. There are also pastoral tribes subjected by other pastoral nomads, the latter forming the nobility and the military part of society. Finally we find subjected tribes of hunters, smiths,[277]etc.; here we have sometimes rather to deal with a voluntary division of labour66.The Somal have several pariah castes. Among the Wer-Singellis in North Somaliland we find the following: 1º. Midgân, smiths and traders; these, by acquiring considerable wealth, sometimes win so much regard, that even a Somali noble deigns to marry his daughter to a Midgân. 2º. Tómal, who are employed by Somali nobles as servants, herdsmen and camel-drivers, and are also obliged to go to war. The noble Wer-Singelli carries sword and spear, whereas the Tomali uses bow and arrows; sometimes a Midgân girl is given him as a wife, but never the daughter of a noble Somali. The Tómal, however, belong to the tribe. 3º. Jibbir, who are very much despised. They have no fixed habitations; they roam in families over the country, from tribe to tribe, as jugglers and magic doctors. Everybody, for fear of sorcery, gives them food and presents, and in return receives from them amulets, made of stone and roots. They contract no marriage outside their own caste67.The Massai, true warriors and raiders, “keep a subjected tribe, the Wa-rombutta, who do their hunting and what meagre agriculture they indulge in. This tribe is insignificant in appearance, and although servile and subject to the Massai are not slaves; they present almost the appearance of dwarfs.” The Wandorobo too, according to Thomson, are regarded by the Massai as a kind of serfs, and treated accordingly; and Johnston calls them a helot race of hunters and smiths68.Among the Bogos “patronage results from military subjection or from the helpless state of separate immigrants with regard to a strong and closely united nation. As the nobles carefully trace their pedigrees, it is easy to find out the Tigres. Tigre means a man of Ethiopian extraction, who speaks the Tigre language. Some Tigre families, subjected from time immemorial, have immigrated together with the family of Gebre Terke [the legendary ancestor of the Bogos]. Others already lived in[278]the country, and unable to withstand the invasion, hastened to submit in order to be tolerated. The Bogos seem to have taken possession of the country in a very pacific and forbearing way, and unlike the Normans and other European invaders, do not interfere with the regulation of landed property, so that the ancient aborigines still own most of the land. The third class is composed of foreign families who, being for some reason unable to agree with their countrymen, settle in the country of the Bogos and place themselves under their protection, which still continually occurs. A member of the Boas family [i.e.of the Bogos nobility], however poor and weak, never becomes a Tigre; his origin is a guarantee of his independence. A Tigre, however mighty and rich, cannot become a Schmagilly [noble]; for the Tigres, who are a compound of various elements, cannot trace their origin so far back as the Schmagillies who pretend to spring all from the same ancestor. Moreover, the oppression is so slight, that a revolution is unimaginable”69.Among the Takue the state of the Tigres is the same as among the Bogos; formerly they brought beer to their lords; now they pay them a small tribute of corn and fat70.Marea Tigres have a harder lot. Two kinds of obligations are incumbent on them: towards their respective masters, and towards the nobilityen bloc. Even the poorest noble never becomes a Tigre, and does not perform degrading work, such as for instance milking. The Tigre pays his master yearly 8 bottles of fat, a measure of corn, and every week a leathern bag with milk. Of every cow killed by a Tigre the master receives a considerable portion; a cow belonging to a Tigre, which dies a natural death, falls entirely to the master. As for the Tigres’ obligations towards the nobility as a whole, on several occasions they have to give up their cattle for the nobility. Among the Black Marea the Tigres own most of the land; among the Red Marea the greater part of the land is in the hands of impoverished nobles, who live chiefly upon the rent of their landed property. Another class are the Dokono, who are obliged to choose a patron and pay a tribute, but[279]are held in rather high esteem and often marry daughters of the nobles; they own land and herds and are much given to trading71.Among the Beni Amer the same distinction, of nobles and subjects, prevails. The latter are called Woréza. “We shall speak of master and servant,” says Munzinger “though the latter term does not quite answer the purpose. The state of things we are going to describe much resembles that which we have met with among the aristocrats of the Anseba; among the Beni Amer, however, the servant is a feoffee rather than a protégé. But as he derives his wealth from his master, to whom he owes what we may call interest, his state is one of much greater dependence.… Among the Beni Amer it is an ancient custom, that a lord distributes his wealth among his servants;e.g.if he receives 100 cows as his portion of the spoils of war, he does not add them to his herd, but leaves them to his servants as a present. When the servant marries, the lord presents him with a camel. In every emergency the servant applies to his lord, who helps him whenever possible. All these presents become the true property of the recipient; the servant may do with them as he likes, sell and even spend them; the lord may upbraid him for it, but legally has nothing to do with it. On the death of the servant the presents devolve upon his heirs. But the lord has a kind of usufruct of these presents; the servant provides him with fat and daily brings him a certain quantity of milk,i.e.he feeds the lord and his family. Often has the lord to wait for his supper till midnight, because the servant provides for himself first. The servant, moreover, has to provide the funeral sacrifice for his lord and for every member of the latter’s family; he leaves to the lord every sterile cow, and when he kills a beast he brings him the breast-piece. He stands by his lord in every emergency, and even assists him according to his means towards paying the tribute”. The servant is, so to speak, a tenant of his lord. As the Beni Amer are nomads, there is no land to distribute; the pasture has no owner; therefore the fief can only consist in movable property. As most of the wealth of the country is[280]in the hands of the servants, they have a decisive voice in every public council; they have to find out where the best pastures are, where the camp has to be erected72.Similar phenomena present themselves outside North-East Africa.In the second chapter of Part I we have met with subjected tribes in South Africa, such as Fengu, Makalahiri, etc., sometimes called slaves by our ethnographers73.Geoffroy speaks of settled tribes being in some way the vassals of the Larbas. Theksoursare buildings in which the nomads preserve their corn, dates and wool; these stores are guarded by settled tribes, that permanently live there and receive one tenth of the preserved stock yearly. The nomads look upon all settled tribes as degenerate beings and inferiors74. Here we have to deal with a voluntary division of labour, rather than with subjection.In Circassia, according to Bell, the serfs are prisoners of war and the ancient inhabitants of the country. The latter are perhaps the same peasants who, according to Klaproth, may not be sold apart from the land75.It is remarkable, that in Central Asia and Siberia we do not find a single instance of this subjection of tribes as such76. This is probably the reason why in these parts members of the tribe are so often employed as servants.Where nearly all work is left to subjected tribes or castes, and the nobles do nothing but fight, there is not much use for slave labour. The nobles do not want slaves, because all work required by them is performed by their subjects.We have now found a new cause, from which in some cases slaves are not wanted: the subjection of tribes as such, which serves as a substitute for slavery.[Contents]§ 2.Slavery among pastoral tribes.Yet several pastoral tribes keep slaves; this has still to be[281]accounted for. We shall inquire first, whether thesecondary causeswe have found in the last paragraph are at work here.1º.Condition of women.On the Pacific Coast of North America the men sometimes procure slaves, in order to relieve the women of a part of their task. There are some details on record suggestive of the same state of things among some pastoral tribes. Among the Circassians, Bahima and Beduan (pastoral tribes), Waganda, pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu, Ossetes and Gallas (agricultural tribes depending largely on cattle for their subsistence), slaves are employed for household work. The same is the case with female slaves among the Larbas and Somal of the towns. Munzinger states that only few Beduan are rich enough to keep a female slave or a maid-servant; therefore in most families the preparing of food falls to the share of the wife, this being almost her only occupation77. Hence we may infer that among the Beduan, and probably among some other tribes, slaves are procured by the men for the benefit of the women.2º.Preserving of food.This does not seem to require much labour among pastoral tribes. On the Pacific Coast of North America the fish have to be prepared for winter use. But where men live upon the products of their cattle, food is not at one time much more abundant than at another.3º.Trade and industry.Household work, sometimes performed by slaves, does not seem to serve the purposes of trade, as on the Pacific Coast; there is not a single detail on record, that would lead us to suppose that it does. We even find particulars tending to prove the contrary. Among the Beni Amer, who have many slaves, the women are continually occupied in making mats, the proceeds of which labour are often sufficient to pay the tribute to the Turks78. Slaves do not seem to join in this occupation.Among the Larbas free women manufacture tissues, which are sold abroad79. Probably slaves are not capable of performing such fine work.Among the Yorubas and pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu[282]the slaves are occupied in trading. But these tribes are not nomadic; moreover, these slaves do not, like the slaves on the Pacific Coast, prepare the articles of commerce, but are themselves the traders, which is quite another thing.4º.Slaves wanted as warriors.Slaves sometimes serve to augment the military strength of the community. From the survey of the work done by slaves, given in the beginning of this chapter, it appears that they are often employed in warfare, viz. among the nomadic Somal and Danakil, Kafirs, pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu, Mandingoes and Yorubas; probably also among the Bogos, where they generally take to robbery. Circassian slaves cannot be compelled to go to war80. Hence it seems to follow that they may go if they like. Among the Beni Amer native-born slaves are avenged by their own relatives; so these slaves are armed, and probably fight together with their masters.The ensuing statement strikingly shows how highly slaves are valued as warriors among the nomadic Somal and Danakil. If a slave kills one enemy, he becomes free; if two or more, he is entitled to being adopted. Having killed ten enemies, he becomes a person of rank and enjoys many privileges81.In these cases slaves strengthen the military force of the tribe. But the tribe profits only indirectly by this reinforcement of the family. Most pastoral nomads live in comparatively small groups, rather independently; there is no strong central government82. And where quarrels between these small groups are frequent, the more numerous the family (in the wider sense, the Romanfamilia, including slaves), the better will the head of the family be able to maintain his position83. And pastoral nomads have always a great motive for fighting: they can enrich themselves by a successful raid. Among hunting, fishing, and agricultural tribes, if the conqueror does not want to keep the vanquished as slaves, war gives little profit84. But[283]in the raids pastoral nomads make on each other, the successful raider may acquire numerous herds,i.e.great wealth. Therefore it is of the utmost importance for a man to have as numerous afamiliaas possible.When speaking of the Larbas, we have seen that their mode of life isun peu toujours comme la guerre. Their describer states: “Theft is the most threatening evil the nomad has to deal with; he is therefore most severe in suppressing it, the punishment being invariably death.” He also speaks of free servants, members of the family, who live under the protection and at the expense of some rich head of a family; they are generally very numerous, and form a body of clients that strengthens their patron’s power85.Levchine, speaking of the Kazak Kirghiz, says: “Their feuds are caused by the unrestrained desire for plunder, that ruins and entirely demoralizes them; this plundering is calledbaranta, Thesebarantasconsist in reciprocal cattle-stealing, from which often sanguinary combats result.… And we must not think that public hatred or contempt falls on those who are addicted to these horrible excesses; on the contrary, they enjoy a reputation for bravery, and are distinguished by the name ofBatyrorBoghatyr, which name spreads through all the hordes the fame of their exploits. Many of these braves, calledBatyrfor their plundering ardour, though many years dead, still live in the remembrance of their countrymen, and their names are celebrated.” Accordingly, one of the qualities required in a chief is a large family, that gives him the power to maintain his authority86.Among the Beni Amer, where it seems to be quite an ordinary thing for a noble to receive 100 cows as his portion of the spoils of war, it is a great support for a man to have many children, as in these countries family is opposed to family87.A writer of the 18thcentury tells us that “the Chukchi who live to the north of the river Anadir, are not subjected to the Russian empire, and often make raids on those brought under Russian control, on the Koryakes as well as on the Chukchi,[284]killing or making prisoners all they meet, and carrying off their herds of reindeer”88.Among the Somal and Gallas internal wars are very frequent; among the former most wars are marauding expeditions. And here too the possession of wife and children is indispensable; an unmarried man cannot attain to wealth and power89.Among the Ama-Xosa and Ovaherero the chief object of warfare is cattle-stealing. Fugitives from other tribes are never delivered up by the Ama-Xosa, whatever the reason of their flight; for they strengthen the chief’s power. Another fact, showing the great importance they attach to the numerical strength of their tribe, is this, that he who kills a man or womanbyaccident has to pay a fine to the chief, as a compensation for the loss sufferedbythe government of the tribe90.We have already seen that the Massai are “true warriors and raiders” and that the Mairs and Meenas spend their time in “marauding, plundering and murdering”91.We see that among these tribes everybody is desirous of having as many people about him as possible for the protection of his own property and the capturing of his neighbour’s. And a convenient means of procuring such people is the purchase of slaves.There is one more secondary cause here, which we have not met with before. It is sometimes stated that keeping slaves is a mereluxury. Now rich nomads, like all rich people, love luxury. Like the rich Kazak Kirghiz who told Levchine that the possession of over 8000 horses procured him a reputation among his countrymen, many rich nomads will win renown by possessing a large retinue of slaves. Thus for instance we know that among the Beni Amer slave labour is of little use; yet it is stated, that the Beni Amer are ambitious to possess many slaves92. And slaves are preferable, as objects of luxury, to free servants. For slaves, generally acquired from beyond the limits of the tribe, are much more apt to gratify the pride of the rich man by their submission, than poor freemen,[285]who are always conscious of theirmembershipof the tribe and unwilling to be trampled down. The latter fact is proved by several statements of ethnographers.If a rich Samoyede refuses to give his poor countryman a reindeer for food, the latter has the right to carry off one or more from the rich man’s herd; the law does not give the owner any hold upon him93.Among the Yakuts, according to Müller, the rich sustain their poor fellow-tribesmen; if the latter lose their reindeer, they are indemnified by the rich. Another writer tells us that the poor, when dying of hunger, refrain from slaughtering an animal, from fear of losing their independence94.Similarly among the Ostyaks “members of the same tribe, whether large or small, consider themselves as relations, even where the common ancestor is unknown, and where the evidence of consanguinity is wholly wanting. Nevertheless, the feeling of consanguinity, sometimes real, sometimes conventional, is the fundamental principle of the union. The rich, of which there are few, help the poor, who are many. There is not much that can change hands. The little, however, that is wanted by the needy is taken as a right rather than a favour”95.The Altaians are very sensitive about their liberty. “Every poor man who joins a rich family considers himself a member of it. He will perish of hunger, rather than comply with a demand of his rich neighbour made in a commanding tone”96.Licata tells us that hungry Danakil go to their chief and say: “I am hungry, give me something to eat”97.Among the Larbas free labourers “work for one more fortunate than themselves, but not for a superior; for notwithstanding the relation of employer and employed, equality prevails”98.It is easy to understand that slaves are preferred to such servants. Only in one case is this preference mentioned by an ethnographer. Munzinger states that the slaves bought by the rich Beduan for household work are generally more trusted[286]than ordinary servants, as they are riveted to their position99. But we may safely suppose that in other cases also this circumstance has furthered the growth of slavery.We have explained why pastoral tribes have no great use for slave labour. We have also mentioned some motives that may induce such tribes to keep slaves. But the fact has not yet been accounted for, that some pastoral tribes keep slaves and others do not. Whence this difference? It has been shown that slavery does not only exist among pastoral tribes that till the soil to a limited extent. Among all pastoral tribes subsistence is dependent on capital. Wealth, too, exists among all these tribes100; and we cannot see why slaves, as a luxury, would be wanted by one such tribe more than by another. As slaves are sometimes employed as warriors, we might be inclined to suppose that slavery exists among all warlike tribes, and among these only. But there are several pastoral tribes which, though very warlike, do not keep slaves: Kazak Kirghiz, Turkomans, Massai, and some pastoral nomads of South Africa.That the subjection of tribes as such in stead of individual slaves, of which we have spoken in the last paragraph, cannot account for all cases in which slavery does not exist, becomes evident, if we take into consideration that most of the pastoral tribes of North-East Africa, which keep other tribes in subjection, practise slavery, whereas in Central Asia and Siberia we find neither subjected tribes nor slaves.Therefore there must be other causes.In chapter II we have spoken ofexternal causes: it may be that slaves would be of great use, and yet cannot be kept, because the coercive power of the tribe is not strong enough. We have also seen that this coercive power is most strongly developed where men have fixed habitations, live in rather large groups and preserve food for the time of scarcity, and where there is a group of somewhat homogeneous tribes maintaining, constant relations with each other. Pastoral tribes are nomadic,[287]do not live together in very large groups, and do not want to preserve food, for they have their supply of food always at hand. Yet the fact that several pastoral tribes keep slaves proves that at least among these the coercive power is strong enough. We shall try to find a cause peculiar to these tribes, that enables them to keep slaves. Now it is remarkable that our positive cases are nearly all of them found in a few definite parts of the globe: North-East Africa, the Caucasus, and Arabia; whereas the pastoral nomads of Siberia, Central Asia, India, and South Africa, with one exception (the Ovaherero), do not keep slaves. And the parts where slavery exists are exactly those where the slave-trade has for a long time been carried on on a large scale. Accordingly, the slaves these tribes keep are often purchased from slave-traders and in several cases belong to inferior races.The slaves of the Aeneze Bedouins are Negroes101.The slaves kept by the Larbas are Negroes purchased from slave-trading caravans102.Although we find no description of slave-trade among the Circassians, slaves in the Caucasus are exported on a large scale103.Most slaves found among the Somal and Danakil are articles of transit trade: they are purchased from interior tribes and intended to be sold to Arabians. A Somali never becomes the slave of a Somali, and prisoners of war are not enslaved104.Many Beduan make it their business to steal slaves, whom they sell in Massowah105.The slaves kept by the Beni Amer are either captured from enemies or purchased abroad; a Beni Amer never loses his freedom. Slaves are not, however, often sold abroad106.On the other hand, the pastoral tribes of Central Asia and Siberia live in secluded parts, far from the centres of the slave-trade.The slave-trade greatly facilitates the keeping of slaves. Where slaves are brought by slave-dealers from remote parts, it is much easier to keep them than where they have to be[288]captured from enemies,i.e.from the neighbours; in the latter case the slaves are very likely to run away and return to their native country; but a purchased slave transported from a great distance cannot so easily return; if he succeeded in escaping, he would be instantly recaptured by one of the foreign tribes whose countries he would have to traverse. Moreover, some tribes may, by their intercourse with slave-traders, have become familiar with the idea of slavery, and so the slave-trade may have suggested to them the keeping of slaves for their own use.There is another circumstance, which may partially account for the existence of slavery among some of these tribes: the slaves are often Negroes. And Negroes have always and everywhere been enslaved; they seem to be more fit for slaves than most races of mankind. Galton, speaking of the Damaras, says: “These savages court slavery. You engage one of them as a servant, and you find that he considers himself your property, and that you are, in fact, become the owner of a slave. They have no independence about them, generally speaking, but follow a master as spaniels would. Their hero-worship is directed to people who have wit and strength enough to ill-use them. Revenge is a very transient passion in their character, it gives way to admiration of the oppressor. The Damaras seem to me to love nothing; the only strong feelings they possess, which are not utterly gross and sensual, are those of admiration and fear. They seem to be made for slavery, and naturally fall into its ways”107. And Hutter, describing the Bali tribes of Cameroon, remarks that the Negro wants to be ruled and patiently endures any amount of oppression108. Similar descriptions may undoubtedly be given of many other Negro tribes. Moreover several slave-keeping nomadic tribes are Semites and Hamites, and therefore look upon the Negroes as an inferior race. Now, where slaves are procured mainly for military purposes (and we have seen that this is often the case with pastoral tribes), an absorption of foreigners into the tribe would answer the purpose as well as, and perhaps better than, slavery. But where the foreigners belong to inferior races, the members of the tribe[289]are not likely to intermarry with them and look upon them as their equals; they remain slaves, though they are not of great use as such. We must also take into consideration that inferior races are not so much to be dreaded as superior peoples; the latter, if individuals belonging to them were kept as slaves, might retaliate upon the slave-owners. This may have been the reason why the Kazak Kirghiz who, in Levchine’s time, kidnapped many Russians, always sold them abroad: it would not have been safe to keep them as slaves. Accordingly, Pallas states that in his time they used to kidnap men on the Russian frontiers towards the time when they were going to remove with their herds, so that they could not be pursued109.In the second chapter of this Part we have remarked that the growth of slavery is furthered by the existence of a group of more or less similar tribes, the slave-trade being in such cases the means of spreading slavery over the group. We may say now that, whether such a group exists or not, the slave-trade facilitates the keeping of slaves. When the coercive power of a tribe is not strong enough for the keeping of prisoners as slaves, the slave-trade may enable such a tribe to keep slaves; for the keeping of purchased slaves, brought from a great distance, does not require so much coercive power.We see that the difference between the slave-keeping and the other pastoral tribes consists in external circumstances. Pastoral tribes have no strong motives for making slaves, for the use of slave labour is small. On the other hand, there are no causes absolutely preventing them from keeping slaves. These tribes are, so to speak, in a state of equilibrium; a small additional cause on either side turns the balance. One such additional cause is the slave-trade; another is the neighbourhood of inferior races. There may be other small additional causes, peculiar to single tribes. We shall not inquire whether there are, but content ourselves with the foregoing conclusions, of which the principal are these, that the taming of animals does not naturally lead to the taming of men, and that the relation between capital and labour among pastoral tribes renders the economic use of slavery very small.[290]Recapitulating, we may remark that our general theory, that there is no great use for slave labour where subsistence depends on capital, is fully verified by our investigation of economic life among pastoral tribes.Two secondary internal causes found in the second chapter have been also met with among pastoral tribes: slaves are sometimes employed in warfare, and sometimes for domestic labour to relieve the women of their task. Two new secondary factors have been found in this chapter: slaves are kept as a luxury; and sometimes the subjection of tribes as such, serving as a substitute for slavery, makes slavery proper superfluous.With regard to the external causes it has been shown that the coercive power of pastoral tribes is not very strong, as they are nomadic and live in rather small groups; but this want is sometimes compensated for by the slave-trade and the neighbourhood of inferior races. The two latter circumstances may therefore rank as new external causes, the slave-trade taking the place of the existence of a homogeneous group. On the Pacific Coast of N. America it is the trade between tribes of the same culture, among pastoral nomads it is the trade with Arabia, etc.; but in either case it is the slave-trade that furthers the growth of slavery.Recapitulation of the causes we have found up to the present.Furthering the growth of slavery.Hindering the growth of slavery.I. Internal causes.A.General.1º. Subsistence easily acquired and not dependent on capital.1º. Subsistence dependent on capital.2º. Subsistence not dependent on capital, but difficult to procure.[291]B.Secondary economic:1º. Preserving of food.1º. Female labour making slave labour superfluous.2º. Trade and industry.3º. A high position of women.2º. Subjection of tribes as such.C.Secondary non-economic:1º. Slaves wanted for military purposes.1º. Militarism making slavery impossible.2º. Slaves kept as a luxury.II. External causes:1º. Fixed habitations.2º. Living in large groups.3º. Preserving of food110.4º. The slave-trade.5º. The neighbourhood of inferior races.[292]

[Contents]§ 1.Capital and labour among pastoral tribes.The number of these tribes is not large, as they are found in a few parts of the world only. Moreover, the descriptions available to us were in many cases too incomplete to justify any inference as to their having or not having slaves.The clear cases noticed by us are the following.Positive cases.Arabia:Aeneze Bedouins,Larbas.2Caucasus:Circassians,Kabards.2Bantu tribes:Ovaherero,Bahima.2Hamitic group:Beduan,Beni Amer,Somal,Danakil.410Negative cases.India:Todas.1Central Asia:Kazak Kirghiz,Altaians,Turkomans.3Siberia:Samoyedes,Tunguz,Yakuts,nomadic Koryakes.4[263]Bantu tribes:Ama-Xosa,Ama-Zulu,some divisions of the Mundombe.3Hamatic group:Massai.112We see that there are almost as many positive as negative cases. So those theorists are wrong, who hold that the taming of animals naturally leads to the taming of men1.It might, however, be that the non-existence of slavery in our negative cases were due to a special, external cause, viz. that these tribes were so inclosed between more powerful nations as not to be able to procure slaves, though slaves would be of much use to them. A brief survey of the political state of these tribes shows that they are not all in this position. The Kazak Kirghiz, in Levchine’s time, kidnapped slaves whom they sold abroad. The Massai are very warlike and adopt captives. The Turkomans are “the intermediate agents for carrying on the slave-trade”2. The Ama-Xosa and Ama-Zulu are also very warlike3. We see that there are some pastoral tribes that, though able to procure slaves, do not keep any. The non-existence of slavery among them must be due to other, more internal, causes.It might also be that our positive cases were exceptions to a general rule. For many pastoral tribes, though subsisting mainly by cattle-breeding, carry on agriculture besides. If these only kept slaves, and employed them chiefly in work connected with agriculture, slavery would prove foreign to pastoral nomadism as such; for then these tribes would only keep slaves in their quality as agriculturists.We shall inquire whether this be so; and for this purpose we shall give a survey of the work imposed upon slaves among pastoral tribes. This survey, besides enabling us to decide upon the question at issue, will show what place slavery occupies in pastoral life.Among the Larbas the boys (also free boys) guard the cattle[264]on the pasture-ground, whereas the work that requires more skill (the tending of young animals, the breaking of horses, etc.) is equally divided between master and slaves4.Circassian slaves, according to Bell, till the soil, tend the cattle and perform domestic labour. Klaproth, however, states that the peasants may only be sold together with the land; so they are rather a kind of serfs. Domestic slaves may be sold separately5.According to Roscoe, among the Bahima, “the women’s duties are to wash the milk pots, perhaps it would be better to say see the pots are washed, because the work generally falls upon the slaves to perform”6.Munzinger speaks of domestic labour being imposed on slaves by the Beduan. Most of these slaves are women7.Among the Beni Amer it is considered an honour to have many slaves. “Properly speaking slaves serve their master only when children. Adult female slaves are concubines, live with their master, but are exempt from nearly all labour; adult male slaves generally despise all work, and belong to the retinue of the master. The master derives no real profit from his slaves.” According to Von Müller the fabrication of tar falls to the share of the slave, such work being below the dignity of a freeman8.Paulitschke tells us that among the nomadic Somal and Danakil slavery is not profitable; for the territories inhabited by them are thinly peopled, agriculture is insignificant, and these cattle-breeders get their subsistence rather easily; moreover they would be unable to support a considerable number of slaves by the produce of their cattle. Therefore among the Danakil on the river Aussa and the Rahanwîn Somal on the lower Wêbi-Schabêli, where slaves are employed in agriculture, there is more use for slave labour. Among the nomadic Somal and Danakil slaves appear also to be employed in warfare. According to Bottego, whose account applies to the Somal of the towns, adult male slaves till the soil, build houses, and perform the rudest and most fatiguing kinds of work. The[265]boys lead the cattle to the pasture-ground; the women are employed in household work and often are concubines of their masters9.There are some tribes that subsist mainly on agriculture, but also, to a great extent, on cattle-breeding. It may be of some use to give a survey of the work done by slaves, among them too; it will appear, then, whether they keep their slaves for agricultural purposes only, or employ them also for pastoral work.Among the Kafirs some slaves are blacksmiths. In war a slave boy beats the drum10. Our informant speaks only incidentally of slave labour; he does not mean to say that this is the only work performed by slaves.Among the Barotse young slaves are given as pages to the children of freemen. Slaves till the soil and tend the cattle; slave boys are employed as herdsmen11.In a description of the Waganda it is said: “One of the principal evils resulting from slavery in Uganda is that it causes all manual labour to be looked upon as derogatory to the dignity of a free man”12.Among the Mandingoes native-born slaves enjoy much liberty; they tend the cattle, and go to war, even without their masters. Freemen work as much as slaves. Every Mandingo, to whatever class he belongs, is occupied in agriculture. The tending of horses is incumbent on slave boys13.Hildebrandt states that the occupations of the Sakalavas are not many. In North Sakalavaland, however, rice is cultivated for export, and so there is more labour wanted here; therefore in this district slavery prevails to a large extent14.Among the Bogos there are hardly 200 slaves (whereas Munzinger estimates the total population at 8400). Slaves are of little use to their owners. Male slaves live separately and generally take to robbery. Female slaves, having no opportunity to marry, become prostitutes and live rather independently15.[266]The Takue have very few slaves. In their laws and customs they show a close resemblance to the Bogos16.Among the pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu agriculture is incumbent on slaves. The slaves also share in their masters’ slave-raids. Jansen gives some more details about the work of slaves in the Sulu Islands. The ordinary occupations of slaves are agriculture, fishing, manufacture of salt, trade, and domestic work17.The slaves of the Geges and Nagos of Porto Novo are chiefly employed in agriculture18.Among the Ossetes the slaves perform household work; the peasants are serfs19.The slaves captured and purchased by the Gallas are generally sold to foreign traders; in large households they are sometimes retained and employed in various kinds of work. In another place our informant states that most slaves are employed in agriculture20.Yoruba slaves are employed in trade and warfare21.We see that slaves are employed in agriculture among the agricultural Somal and Danakil, Fulbe, Barotse, Mandingoes, Sakalavas, pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu, Geges and Nagos, Gallas; and very probably also among the Waganda, where they perform “all manual labour.” As the details given by our ethnographers are not always complete, it is possible that in some more cases slaves are employed in agriculture. But it is sufficiently clear, that among the Beni Amer, nomadic Somal and Danakil, Bogos, and probably also among the Beduan and Takue, slaves do not till the soil. Among the Ossetes and Circassians the peasants are serfs, slaves being employed in household work. What work is incumbent on slaves among the Aeneze Bedouins we are not told; but agriculture seems to be unknown among them. Among the Larbas the daily work is equally divided between master and slaves, agriculture holding a very subordinate place. Hence it appears that several of these tribes keep slaves, though they do not[267]employ them in agriculture; pastoral tribes, as such, sometimes keep slaves.But another inference we can draw from the foregoing survey of slave labour is this. Where slaves are not employed in agriculture or in such other work as requires a settled life (e.g.house-building among the Somal of the towns, fishing and manufacture of salt among the pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu), the use of slave labour is not great. Among the Beni Amer, Bogos, and nomadic Somal and Danakil slave-keeping is stated to be a mere luxury. The Sakalavas, except in the rice-exporting district, do not want much slave labour. And only in one case, viz. among the Larbas, is it clearly stated that the chief business of slaves is pastoral work.This tends to prove, thatamong true pastoral tribes slavery, as a system of labour, is of little moment. This inference is verified by several statements about slaves being often manumitted or in the course of time becoming practically free.Burckhardt, speaking of the slaves of the Aeneze Bedouins, says: “After a certain lapse of time they are always emancipated, and married to persons of their own colour”22.Among the Circassians slaves are often manumitted. A slave can also purchase his freedom, and then becomes a member of a Circassian fraternity23.The Beni Amer have two kinds of slaves, newly-purchased and native-born. “Their condition differs so much, that only the former may properly be called slaves; the latter are rather serfs. The newly-purchased slave is treated like every Mohammedan slave, he may be sold and does not yet belong to the family. The native-born slave has only the name, not the state of a slave; this appears from his being allowed to intermarry with the Woreza (subjected class). The children born of such a marriage are considered free, as they descend from a free mother. In Barka the Kishendoa,i.e.native-born slaves, who inhabit a camp of tents of their own, are governed by a chief who is one of their own number, and intermarry with the Woreza. Native-born slaves may live where they like and have the same right of inheritance as freemen; only if such[268]a slave leaves no relatives does the master succeed to his goods.… In the blood-feud too the native-born slave is in a peculiar condition. If a newly-purchased slave is killed, his price is restored to his owner; for such a slave is looked upon as an article of trade. The native-born slave, however, belongs to the family; therefore his blood requires blood; he is avenged by his relatives if there are such, and otherwise by his master; if this is not practicable because the murderer is a man of power, the matter is hushed up; but a compensation is never given”24.The Somal often buy slaves whom they manumit soon afterwards25.Among the Kafirs of India each tribe is governed by a council. Even slaves can be elected as members of this council26.Our survey of the work done by slaves shows in the third place, that slaves are often employed in warfare. This will be accounted for later on.Here we have only to emphasize the fact, that to pastoral tribes as such slave labour is of little use. This makes it easy to understand why so many of them dispense with slavery altogether.Going on to inquire what is the cause of this phenomenon, we may remember the general conclusion we have arrived at in the last paragraph, viz. that slave labour is of little use, where subsistence is either dependent on capital, or very difficult to procure. Now it is easy to see that among pastoral tribes subsistence entirely depends on capital. Among people who live upon the produce of their cattle, a man who owns no cattle,i.e.no capital, has no means of subsistence. Accordingly, among pastoral tribes we find rich and poor men; and the poor often offer themselves as labourers to the rich27.Among the Syrian Bedouins “to every tent, or to every two or three tents, there is a shepherd or person to attend the cattle, either a younger son or servant; he receives wages for ten months”28.[269]Among the Larbas alms are given to the poor. The social rank of the head of a family depends on the number of his children, his practical knowledge of the pastoral art, and his wealth. There are free labourers who are paid in kind. Herdsmen have the usufruct of a part of the herds they tend. Generally the labourer takes a tenth in kind at the close of the time agreed upon; moreover he receives his daily food during the time of his engagement29.Levchine, speaking of the Kazak Kirghiz, tells us: “Once I asked a Kirghiz, owner of 8000 horses, why he did not sell every year a part of his stud. He answered: “Why should I sell that which is my pleasure? I want no money; if I had any, I should be obliged to shut it up in a box, where nobody would see it; but when my steeds run over the steppe everybody looks at them; everybody knows that they are mine; and people always remember that I am rich.” In this manner is the reputation of being a rich man acquired throughout the hordes; such is the wealth that procures them the regard of their countrymen and the title ofbaï(rich man), which sometimes gives them an ascendency over the offspring of the khans and the most deserving old men.” On the other hand the number of beggars is very considerable. Levchine makes no mention of servants; but Radloff, who about thirty years later visited the Kazak Kirghiz, says: “There exists here a class of servants, whom I found in every well-to-do family. The herds are generally tended by hired herdsmen, who are subjected to a kind of supervision.” The rich also engage poor families to till their lands. A man who loses all his cattle has no resource left but to offer himself as a labourer30.The same first-rate ethnographer informs us that among the Altaians “rich and poor eat the same kind of food; the difference is only in the size of the kettle and the quantity of food. The poor man eats what he has got, which most frequently is very little; and he would starve but that the rich have such an abundance of food, that in summer they readily entertain whoever comes to theirjurts(tents).” When a beast[270]is being killed, the poor neighbours in large numbers throng towards the place and try to secure those portions of the bowels that the rich disdain; they have to fight for them with the dogs, who are equally fond of the delicacies. When all guests have been served, pieces of meat are thrown towards the door, where poor men and dogs try to secure them. The picked bones are also thrown to the poor, who clean them so thoroughly that nothing but the bare bone is left to the dogs. The cattle of the rich are generally tended by poor neighbours, who live in the vicinity of the rich, partake of their food, and receive their worn clothes. Young girls often seek employment as servants; orphans of poor men also serve the rich31.Among the Kalmucks there are poor people who serve the rich as herdsmen32.Prschewalsky states that rich Mongols, who own thousands of beasts, employ herdsmen who are poor and have no relations33.The Kurds of Eriwan employ freemen as herdsmen34.Among the Tunguz the poor generally serve the rich, by whom they are badly treated35.Yakuts, who have less than one head of cattle per soul, must hire themselves out for wages36.Pallas says: “Every Samoyede has his reindeer and tends them himself with the help of his family, except the very rich who employ poor men as herdsmen.” Von Stenin also states that the poor serve the rich. The following anecdote, given by this writer, shows how strongly the desire of wealth influences psychical life among the Samoyedes. One of them depicted the delight of intoxication in these terms: “Spirits taste better than meat. When a man is drunk, he fancies he has many reindeer and thinks himself a merchant. But on coming to his senses he sees that he is poor and has just spent his last reindeer in drinking”37.Of the Koryakes we are told: “Before they were subjected[271]by the Russians, they had neither government nor magistrates; only the rich exercised some authority over the poor.” Their greatest pleasure consists in looking at their herds. The poor are employed in tending the herds of the rich for food and clothing; if they have themselves some reindeer, they are allowed to join them to their master’s herds and tend them together with the latter38.Among the Tuski, according to Georgi, the poor serve the rich as herdsmen39.In North-East Africa the state of things is not quite the same. The pastoral nomads here form the nobility, and tax subjected tribes with tributes and compulsory labour. Servants are not found here so often as in Asia. Sometimes, however, they are found. Thus among the Beni Amer there are herdsmen, maid-servants etc. who work for wages40. The same, perhaps, applies to the Massai, where the man who owns large herds and many wives, enjoys high consideration but a poor man is despised41.“Among all South African natives” says Fritsch “the rich tyrannize over the poor who, in the hope of filling their stomachs, comply with a state of dependence that is not authorized by law”42.Among the Caffres poor men place themselves under the protection of a rich head of a family, build their huts in his kraal, and in reward yield their cattle to him43.Kropf tells us that among the Ama-Xosa the consideration a man enjoys depends on the number of cattle he owns. The poor are fed by the chief and in return render him services44.The Ovaherero despise any one who has no cattle. The rich support many people, who become their dependents, and so they acquire distinction and power45. The children of impoverished families who, according to Andersson46, are kept as slaves, are perhaps rather to be called servants.Among those tribes which are mainly agricultural, but besides[272]subsist largely upon the produce of their cattle, similar phenomena present themselves.Among the Ossetes freemen are often employed as servants47.Among the Bechuanas the possession of cattle and a waggon is a mark of distinction. They mix their porridge with curdled milk, and therefore call a poor man a water-porridge man48.Casalis gives an elaborate description of the value which the Basutos attach to the possession of cattle. Wealth, among them, consists in cattle, and this wealth is the base of the power of the chiefs. By means of the produce of their herds they feed the poor, procure arms for the warriors, support the troops in war and entertain good relations with neighbouring nations. Were a chief to lose his cattle, his power would be at an end49.The Barotse employ as herdsmen young slaves and sons of poor men50.Among the Dinka every man upon an average owns three head of cattle; but there are also poor men, who are the slaves or servants of the rich51. We may safely infer that these “slaves or servants” are servants and not slaves.The sheikh of each Chillook tribe, according to Chaillé Long, detains as slaves those who do not own even a single cow52. Probably the same state of things prevails here as among the Caffres: these poor men are not slaves, but compelled by hunger to seek the protection of a rich man.In the country of the Gallas the value of labour is very small53.The Bogos employ freemen as herdsmen and peasants; they also keep maid-servants54.Among the Amahlubi there are herdsmen, who serve for wages55.We see that, wherever men subsist by cattle-breeding, a peculiar characteristic of economic life presents itself. This characteristic is not the existence of wealth; for wealth also exists among the tribes of the Pacific Coast of North America; yet on the Pacific Coast slave labour is of great use. It is the[273]existence of poverty. On the Pacific Coast the “abundant natural supplies in ocean, stream, and forest” enable each man, be he rich or not, to provide for himself; but among pastoral tribes the means of subsistence are the property of individuals; and those who own no cattle have no resource but to apply to the owners for support56. Therefore, if labourers are wanted, there are always freemen who readily offer their services; and there is no great use for slave labour57.So there is always a supply of labour. On the other hand, the demand for labour is small. There is but little work to be done. Among some pastoral tribes the men spend a great deal of time in idleness58.Prschewalsky, speaking of the Mongols, remarks: “Unlimited laziness is a main characteristic of the nomads; they spend their whole life in idleness, which is furthered by the character of pastoral nomadism. The tending of the cattle is the sole occupation of the Mongol, and this does not nearly require all his time. The guarding of cows and sheep is the business of the women and grown-up children; milking, creaming, butter-making and other domestic labour falls almost entirely to the share of the mistress of the house. The men generally do nothing, and from morning till night ride from onejurt(tent) to another, drinkingkoumissand chattering with their neighbours. The chase, which the nomads are passionately fond of, serves mainly as a pastime.”The Altaians have to survey the cattle; this consists only in riding a few times a day to the herds, and driving them together. The milking of the mares during the summer, which requires some courage, is also the men’s business.Among the Aeneze Bedouins the men’s sole business is feeding the horses, and in the evening milking the camels59.[274]The Kazak Kirghiz, too, are very lazy. They pass a great part of the summer sleeping because of the warmth; and in winter-time they hardly ever leave their tents, because the snow covers the roads. As they are not acquainted with any arts, and the tending of the cattle is their only occupation, there is no need for much work60.Rowney tells us of the Mairs and Meenas of Rajpootana: “The ostensible occupation followed by them was that of goatherds; but the herds were usually left to the charge of their boys and old men, while the more able-bodied spent their time, mounted on their ponies, in marauding, plundering, and murdering”61.Among the Massai the men despise every kind of work. Only warfare is considered an occupation worthy of a man62.It has to be remarked that most of these tribes do not keep slaves; so it is not by imposing all the work upon slaves that the men are enabled to pass their time in idleness; yet they do almost nothing. “The herdsman is lazy,” says Schmoller63, and Schurtz speaks of the aversion from all hard and regular work, which characterizes the pastoral nomads64. This proves that but little labour is wanted. One might object, that perhaps women and boys are overworked. But the fact that the able-bodied men, who form a considerable part of the community, can afford to take life so very easily, sufficiently proves that the total amount of labour required is rather small.Here we find one more reason why pastoral tribes have little use for slave labour. The demand for labour is small; therefore, even if free labourers were not available, only a few slaves would be wanted. Capital is here the principal factor of production, labour holding a subordinate place. Among agricultural tribes, when there is a practically unlimited supply of fertile soil, every person whose labour is available to the tribe can cultivate a piece of ground, and so, the more people there are, the more food can be produced. But among pastoral tribes, as soon as there are people enough within the tribe to guard the cattle, milk the cows, and do the other[275]work required, an increase in the number of labourers is not profitable. There is only a limited demand for labour; therefore, though there may be a temporary scarcity of labour which makes strengthening of the labour forces of the tribe by means of slaves desirable,—when a few slaves have been procured, the point at which a further increase in the number of people gives no profit will soon be reached again.We see that among pastoral tribes little labour is required; and such as is, is easy to procure; for there are always people destitute of capital, who offer themselves as labourers. Therefore slaves are economically of little use.There is, however, one description of a pastoral tribe, in which it is stated, that men as well as women have to work very hard. This is Geoffroy’s capital monography on the Larbas. The head of the family and his sons have to guard the herds, trace and dig pits, share in all operations common to the horsemen of the tribe: raids and battles, the pursuing of thieves, the defense of the pecuniary interests of the family, the depositing of merchandise in theksours(store-houses). The head of the family tends the sick animals, and has the administration of the wool and grain; but practically he will not have much to do with these matters, not considering them worth his attention. But a great part of his time is taken up with keeping watch and marching, and this makes his life a rather hard one. He does not sleep at night; he waters the cattle in the pits orr’dirs; he surrounds his tents with a protecting hedge, thezirba; he struggles against the elements, which often disperse beasts, tents and men. Daily, from the cradle to the tomb, the nomad’s life is a struggle for existence. As a child he already has to look after the cattle; he learns to ride on horseback with his father. When older, whether rich or poor, he has to learn, for several years, to conduct large numbers of cattle, which is a very difficult and dangerous work, to tend the different kinds of animals, to cure them, to sell them, to derive from them as much profit as possible. Pastoral art is more complicated than at first sight it seems, and comprehends a long series of accomplishments. At twenty years the nomad is an accomplished man, thoroughly acquainted with the life he has to lead, enjoying all the physical[276]strength indispensable in the exceptionalmilieuwhere he has to struggle. The two youngest sons of the head of the family our informant describes, 15 and 13 years of age, now perform in the family the duties of herdsmen. Daily occupations of master and slaves are the driving together of the dispersed animals, the tending of the females that have calved, the preparing of special food for the young animals, the dressing of the stronger ones for the saddle and pack-saddle, and the chase of hares and gazelles65.We see that pastoral life is not so easy here as on the fertile plains of Central Asia. But the work that is most necessary here, and also most difficult, is the care for the security of the tribe and its possessions, or, as Geoffroy very appropriately expresses it, “c’est un peu toujours comme la guerre”. And this work cannot be left to slaves; else the slaves would become the masters of the tribe. Warriors are wanted here; labourers not so much.We have now accounted for the non-existence of slavery among many pastoral tribes, and the little use of slave labour among pastoral tribes in general, by the principle laid down in the last paragraph, that, generally speaking, slaves are not wanted where subsistence depends upon capital.In North-East Africa, however, there is one more cause at work, making slavery superfluous. This is the existence of a kind ofsubstitute for slavery, viz.subjection of tribes as such. Pastoral tribes often levy tributes on agricultural tribes, to which they are superior in military strength; the latter cannot easily leave the lands they cultivate and seek a new country; if not too heavily oppressed, they will prefer paying a tribute. And to pastoral nomads the levying of a tax on agricultural tribes brings far more profit than the enslaving of individuals belonging to such tribes, whom they would have to employ either in pastoral labour, which they do not want, or in tilling the soil, which work the nomads would be unable to supervise. There are also pastoral tribes subjected by other pastoral nomads, the latter forming the nobility and the military part of society. Finally we find subjected tribes of hunters, smiths,[277]etc.; here we have sometimes rather to deal with a voluntary division of labour66.The Somal have several pariah castes. Among the Wer-Singellis in North Somaliland we find the following: 1º. Midgân, smiths and traders; these, by acquiring considerable wealth, sometimes win so much regard, that even a Somali noble deigns to marry his daughter to a Midgân. 2º. Tómal, who are employed by Somali nobles as servants, herdsmen and camel-drivers, and are also obliged to go to war. The noble Wer-Singelli carries sword and spear, whereas the Tomali uses bow and arrows; sometimes a Midgân girl is given him as a wife, but never the daughter of a noble Somali. The Tómal, however, belong to the tribe. 3º. Jibbir, who are very much despised. They have no fixed habitations; they roam in families over the country, from tribe to tribe, as jugglers and magic doctors. Everybody, for fear of sorcery, gives them food and presents, and in return receives from them amulets, made of stone and roots. They contract no marriage outside their own caste67.The Massai, true warriors and raiders, “keep a subjected tribe, the Wa-rombutta, who do their hunting and what meagre agriculture they indulge in. This tribe is insignificant in appearance, and although servile and subject to the Massai are not slaves; they present almost the appearance of dwarfs.” The Wandorobo too, according to Thomson, are regarded by the Massai as a kind of serfs, and treated accordingly; and Johnston calls them a helot race of hunters and smiths68.Among the Bogos “patronage results from military subjection or from the helpless state of separate immigrants with regard to a strong and closely united nation. As the nobles carefully trace their pedigrees, it is easy to find out the Tigres. Tigre means a man of Ethiopian extraction, who speaks the Tigre language. Some Tigre families, subjected from time immemorial, have immigrated together with the family of Gebre Terke [the legendary ancestor of the Bogos]. Others already lived in[278]the country, and unable to withstand the invasion, hastened to submit in order to be tolerated. The Bogos seem to have taken possession of the country in a very pacific and forbearing way, and unlike the Normans and other European invaders, do not interfere with the regulation of landed property, so that the ancient aborigines still own most of the land. The third class is composed of foreign families who, being for some reason unable to agree with their countrymen, settle in the country of the Bogos and place themselves under their protection, which still continually occurs. A member of the Boas family [i.e.of the Bogos nobility], however poor and weak, never becomes a Tigre; his origin is a guarantee of his independence. A Tigre, however mighty and rich, cannot become a Schmagilly [noble]; for the Tigres, who are a compound of various elements, cannot trace their origin so far back as the Schmagillies who pretend to spring all from the same ancestor. Moreover, the oppression is so slight, that a revolution is unimaginable”69.Among the Takue the state of the Tigres is the same as among the Bogos; formerly they brought beer to their lords; now they pay them a small tribute of corn and fat70.Marea Tigres have a harder lot. Two kinds of obligations are incumbent on them: towards their respective masters, and towards the nobilityen bloc. Even the poorest noble never becomes a Tigre, and does not perform degrading work, such as for instance milking. The Tigre pays his master yearly 8 bottles of fat, a measure of corn, and every week a leathern bag with milk. Of every cow killed by a Tigre the master receives a considerable portion; a cow belonging to a Tigre, which dies a natural death, falls entirely to the master. As for the Tigres’ obligations towards the nobility as a whole, on several occasions they have to give up their cattle for the nobility. Among the Black Marea the Tigres own most of the land; among the Red Marea the greater part of the land is in the hands of impoverished nobles, who live chiefly upon the rent of their landed property. Another class are the Dokono, who are obliged to choose a patron and pay a tribute, but[279]are held in rather high esteem and often marry daughters of the nobles; they own land and herds and are much given to trading71.Among the Beni Amer the same distinction, of nobles and subjects, prevails. The latter are called Woréza. “We shall speak of master and servant,” says Munzinger “though the latter term does not quite answer the purpose. The state of things we are going to describe much resembles that which we have met with among the aristocrats of the Anseba; among the Beni Amer, however, the servant is a feoffee rather than a protégé. But as he derives his wealth from his master, to whom he owes what we may call interest, his state is one of much greater dependence.… Among the Beni Amer it is an ancient custom, that a lord distributes his wealth among his servants;e.g.if he receives 100 cows as his portion of the spoils of war, he does not add them to his herd, but leaves them to his servants as a present. When the servant marries, the lord presents him with a camel. In every emergency the servant applies to his lord, who helps him whenever possible. All these presents become the true property of the recipient; the servant may do with them as he likes, sell and even spend them; the lord may upbraid him for it, but legally has nothing to do with it. On the death of the servant the presents devolve upon his heirs. But the lord has a kind of usufruct of these presents; the servant provides him with fat and daily brings him a certain quantity of milk,i.e.he feeds the lord and his family. Often has the lord to wait for his supper till midnight, because the servant provides for himself first. The servant, moreover, has to provide the funeral sacrifice for his lord and for every member of the latter’s family; he leaves to the lord every sterile cow, and when he kills a beast he brings him the breast-piece. He stands by his lord in every emergency, and even assists him according to his means towards paying the tribute”. The servant is, so to speak, a tenant of his lord. As the Beni Amer are nomads, there is no land to distribute; the pasture has no owner; therefore the fief can only consist in movable property. As most of the wealth of the country is[280]in the hands of the servants, they have a decisive voice in every public council; they have to find out where the best pastures are, where the camp has to be erected72.Similar phenomena present themselves outside North-East Africa.In the second chapter of Part I we have met with subjected tribes in South Africa, such as Fengu, Makalahiri, etc., sometimes called slaves by our ethnographers73.Geoffroy speaks of settled tribes being in some way the vassals of the Larbas. Theksoursare buildings in which the nomads preserve their corn, dates and wool; these stores are guarded by settled tribes, that permanently live there and receive one tenth of the preserved stock yearly. The nomads look upon all settled tribes as degenerate beings and inferiors74. Here we have to deal with a voluntary division of labour, rather than with subjection.In Circassia, according to Bell, the serfs are prisoners of war and the ancient inhabitants of the country. The latter are perhaps the same peasants who, according to Klaproth, may not be sold apart from the land75.It is remarkable, that in Central Asia and Siberia we do not find a single instance of this subjection of tribes as such76. This is probably the reason why in these parts members of the tribe are so often employed as servants.Where nearly all work is left to subjected tribes or castes, and the nobles do nothing but fight, there is not much use for slave labour. The nobles do not want slaves, because all work required by them is performed by their subjects.We have now found a new cause, from which in some cases slaves are not wanted: the subjection of tribes as such, which serves as a substitute for slavery.

§ 1.Capital and labour among pastoral tribes.

The number of these tribes is not large, as they are found in a few parts of the world only. Moreover, the descriptions available to us were in many cases too incomplete to justify any inference as to their having or not having slaves.The clear cases noticed by us are the following.Positive cases.Arabia:Aeneze Bedouins,Larbas.2Caucasus:Circassians,Kabards.2Bantu tribes:Ovaherero,Bahima.2Hamitic group:Beduan,Beni Amer,Somal,Danakil.410Negative cases.India:Todas.1Central Asia:Kazak Kirghiz,Altaians,Turkomans.3Siberia:Samoyedes,Tunguz,Yakuts,nomadic Koryakes.4[263]Bantu tribes:Ama-Xosa,Ama-Zulu,some divisions of the Mundombe.3Hamatic group:Massai.112We see that there are almost as many positive as negative cases. So those theorists are wrong, who hold that the taming of animals naturally leads to the taming of men1.It might, however, be that the non-existence of slavery in our negative cases were due to a special, external cause, viz. that these tribes were so inclosed between more powerful nations as not to be able to procure slaves, though slaves would be of much use to them. A brief survey of the political state of these tribes shows that they are not all in this position. The Kazak Kirghiz, in Levchine’s time, kidnapped slaves whom they sold abroad. The Massai are very warlike and adopt captives. The Turkomans are “the intermediate agents for carrying on the slave-trade”2. The Ama-Xosa and Ama-Zulu are also very warlike3. We see that there are some pastoral tribes that, though able to procure slaves, do not keep any. The non-existence of slavery among them must be due to other, more internal, causes.It might also be that our positive cases were exceptions to a general rule. For many pastoral tribes, though subsisting mainly by cattle-breeding, carry on agriculture besides. If these only kept slaves, and employed them chiefly in work connected with agriculture, slavery would prove foreign to pastoral nomadism as such; for then these tribes would only keep slaves in their quality as agriculturists.We shall inquire whether this be so; and for this purpose we shall give a survey of the work imposed upon slaves among pastoral tribes. This survey, besides enabling us to decide upon the question at issue, will show what place slavery occupies in pastoral life.Among the Larbas the boys (also free boys) guard the cattle[264]on the pasture-ground, whereas the work that requires more skill (the tending of young animals, the breaking of horses, etc.) is equally divided between master and slaves4.Circassian slaves, according to Bell, till the soil, tend the cattle and perform domestic labour. Klaproth, however, states that the peasants may only be sold together with the land; so they are rather a kind of serfs. Domestic slaves may be sold separately5.According to Roscoe, among the Bahima, “the women’s duties are to wash the milk pots, perhaps it would be better to say see the pots are washed, because the work generally falls upon the slaves to perform”6.Munzinger speaks of domestic labour being imposed on slaves by the Beduan. Most of these slaves are women7.Among the Beni Amer it is considered an honour to have many slaves. “Properly speaking slaves serve their master only when children. Adult female slaves are concubines, live with their master, but are exempt from nearly all labour; adult male slaves generally despise all work, and belong to the retinue of the master. The master derives no real profit from his slaves.” According to Von Müller the fabrication of tar falls to the share of the slave, such work being below the dignity of a freeman8.Paulitschke tells us that among the nomadic Somal and Danakil slavery is not profitable; for the territories inhabited by them are thinly peopled, agriculture is insignificant, and these cattle-breeders get their subsistence rather easily; moreover they would be unable to support a considerable number of slaves by the produce of their cattle. Therefore among the Danakil on the river Aussa and the Rahanwîn Somal on the lower Wêbi-Schabêli, where slaves are employed in agriculture, there is more use for slave labour. Among the nomadic Somal and Danakil slaves appear also to be employed in warfare. According to Bottego, whose account applies to the Somal of the towns, adult male slaves till the soil, build houses, and perform the rudest and most fatiguing kinds of work. The[265]boys lead the cattle to the pasture-ground; the women are employed in household work and often are concubines of their masters9.There are some tribes that subsist mainly on agriculture, but also, to a great extent, on cattle-breeding. It may be of some use to give a survey of the work done by slaves, among them too; it will appear, then, whether they keep their slaves for agricultural purposes only, or employ them also for pastoral work.Among the Kafirs some slaves are blacksmiths. In war a slave boy beats the drum10. Our informant speaks only incidentally of slave labour; he does not mean to say that this is the only work performed by slaves.Among the Barotse young slaves are given as pages to the children of freemen. Slaves till the soil and tend the cattle; slave boys are employed as herdsmen11.In a description of the Waganda it is said: “One of the principal evils resulting from slavery in Uganda is that it causes all manual labour to be looked upon as derogatory to the dignity of a free man”12.Among the Mandingoes native-born slaves enjoy much liberty; they tend the cattle, and go to war, even without their masters. Freemen work as much as slaves. Every Mandingo, to whatever class he belongs, is occupied in agriculture. The tending of horses is incumbent on slave boys13.Hildebrandt states that the occupations of the Sakalavas are not many. In North Sakalavaland, however, rice is cultivated for export, and so there is more labour wanted here; therefore in this district slavery prevails to a large extent14.Among the Bogos there are hardly 200 slaves (whereas Munzinger estimates the total population at 8400). Slaves are of little use to their owners. Male slaves live separately and generally take to robbery. Female slaves, having no opportunity to marry, become prostitutes and live rather independently15.[266]The Takue have very few slaves. In their laws and customs they show a close resemblance to the Bogos16.Among the pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu agriculture is incumbent on slaves. The slaves also share in their masters’ slave-raids. Jansen gives some more details about the work of slaves in the Sulu Islands. The ordinary occupations of slaves are agriculture, fishing, manufacture of salt, trade, and domestic work17.The slaves of the Geges and Nagos of Porto Novo are chiefly employed in agriculture18.Among the Ossetes the slaves perform household work; the peasants are serfs19.The slaves captured and purchased by the Gallas are generally sold to foreign traders; in large households they are sometimes retained and employed in various kinds of work. In another place our informant states that most slaves are employed in agriculture20.Yoruba slaves are employed in trade and warfare21.We see that slaves are employed in agriculture among the agricultural Somal and Danakil, Fulbe, Barotse, Mandingoes, Sakalavas, pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu, Geges and Nagos, Gallas; and very probably also among the Waganda, where they perform “all manual labour.” As the details given by our ethnographers are not always complete, it is possible that in some more cases slaves are employed in agriculture. But it is sufficiently clear, that among the Beni Amer, nomadic Somal and Danakil, Bogos, and probably also among the Beduan and Takue, slaves do not till the soil. Among the Ossetes and Circassians the peasants are serfs, slaves being employed in household work. What work is incumbent on slaves among the Aeneze Bedouins we are not told; but agriculture seems to be unknown among them. Among the Larbas the daily work is equally divided between master and slaves, agriculture holding a very subordinate place. Hence it appears that several of these tribes keep slaves, though they do not[267]employ them in agriculture; pastoral tribes, as such, sometimes keep slaves.But another inference we can draw from the foregoing survey of slave labour is this. Where slaves are not employed in agriculture or in such other work as requires a settled life (e.g.house-building among the Somal of the towns, fishing and manufacture of salt among the pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu), the use of slave labour is not great. Among the Beni Amer, Bogos, and nomadic Somal and Danakil slave-keeping is stated to be a mere luxury. The Sakalavas, except in the rice-exporting district, do not want much slave labour. And only in one case, viz. among the Larbas, is it clearly stated that the chief business of slaves is pastoral work.This tends to prove, thatamong true pastoral tribes slavery, as a system of labour, is of little moment. This inference is verified by several statements about slaves being often manumitted or in the course of time becoming practically free.Burckhardt, speaking of the slaves of the Aeneze Bedouins, says: “After a certain lapse of time they are always emancipated, and married to persons of their own colour”22.Among the Circassians slaves are often manumitted. A slave can also purchase his freedom, and then becomes a member of a Circassian fraternity23.The Beni Amer have two kinds of slaves, newly-purchased and native-born. “Their condition differs so much, that only the former may properly be called slaves; the latter are rather serfs. The newly-purchased slave is treated like every Mohammedan slave, he may be sold and does not yet belong to the family. The native-born slave has only the name, not the state of a slave; this appears from his being allowed to intermarry with the Woreza (subjected class). The children born of such a marriage are considered free, as they descend from a free mother. In Barka the Kishendoa,i.e.native-born slaves, who inhabit a camp of tents of their own, are governed by a chief who is one of their own number, and intermarry with the Woreza. Native-born slaves may live where they like and have the same right of inheritance as freemen; only if such[268]a slave leaves no relatives does the master succeed to his goods.… In the blood-feud too the native-born slave is in a peculiar condition. If a newly-purchased slave is killed, his price is restored to his owner; for such a slave is looked upon as an article of trade. The native-born slave, however, belongs to the family; therefore his blood requires blood; he is avenged by his relatives if there are such, and otherwise by his master; if this is not practicable because the murderer is a man of power, the matter is hushed up; but a compensation is never given”24.The Somal often buy slaves whom they manumit soon afterwards25.Among the Kafirs of India each tribe is governed by a council. Even slaves can be elected as members of this council26.Our survey of the work done by slaves shows in the third place, that slaves are often employed in warfare. This will be accounted for later on.Here we have only to emphasize the fact, that to pastoral tribes as such slave labour is of little use. This makes it easy to understand why so many of them dispense with slavery altogether.Going on to inquire what is the cause of this phenomenon, we may remember the general conclusion we have arrived at in the last paragraph, viz. that slave labour is of little use, where subsistence is either dependent on capital, or very difficult to procure. Now it is easy to see that among pastoral tribes subsistence entirely depends on capital. Among people who live upon the produce of their cattle, a man who owns no cattle,i.e.no capital, has no means of subsistence. Accordingly, among pastoral tribes we find rich and poor men; and the poor often offer themselves as labourers to the rich27.Among the Syrian Bedouins “to every tent, or to every two or three tents, there is a shepherd or person to attend the cattle, either a younger son or servant; he receives wages for ten months”28.[269]Among the Larbas alms are given to the poor. The social rank of the head of a family depends on the number of his children, his practical knowledge of the pastoral art, and his wealth. There are free labourers who are paid in kind. Herdsmen have the usufruct of a part of the herds they tend. Generally the labourer takes a tenth in kind at the close of the time agreed upon; moreover he receives his daily food during the time of his engagement29.Levchine, speaking of the Kazak Kirghiz, tells us: “Once I asked a Kirghiz, owner of 8000 horses, why he did not sell every year a part of his stud. He answered: “Why should I sell that which is my pleasure? I want no money; if I had any, I should be obliged to shut it up in a box, where nobody would see it; but when my steeds run over the steppe everybody looks at them; everybody knows that they are mine; and people always remember that I am rich.” In this manner is the reputation of being a rich man acquired throughout the hordes; such is the wealth that procures them the regard of their countrymen and the title ofbaï(rich man), which sometimes gives them an ascendency over the offspring of the khans and the most deserving old men.” On the other hand the number of beggars is very considerable. Levchine makes no mention of servants; but Radloff, who about thirty years later visited the Kazak Kirghiz, says: “There exists here a class of servants, whom I found in every well-to-do family. The herds are generally tended by hired herdsmen, who are subjected to a kind of supervision.” The rich also engage poor families to till their lands. A man who loses all his cattle has no resource left but to offer himself as a labourer30.The same first-rate ethnographer informs us that among the Altaians “rich and poor eat the same kind of food; the difference is only in the size of the kettle and the quantity of food. The poor man eats what he has got, which most frequently is very little; and he would starve but that the rich have such an abundance of food, that in summer they readily entertain whoever comes to theirjurts(tents).” When a beast[270]is being killed, the poor neighbours in large numbers throng towards the place and try to secure those portions of the bowels that the rich disdain; they have to fight for them with the dogs, who are equally fond of the delicacies. When all guests have been served, pieces of meat are thrown towards the door, where poor men and dogs try to secure them. The picked bones are also thrown to the poor, who clean them so thoroughly that nothing but the bare bone is left to the dogs. The cattle of the rich are generally tended by poor neighbours, who live in the vicinity of the rich, partake of their food, and receive their worn clothes. Young girls often seek employment as servants; orphans of poor men also serve the rich31.Among the Kalmucks there are poor people who serve the rich as herdsmen32.Prschewalsky states that rich Mongols, who own thousands of beasts, employ herdsmen who are poor and have no relations33.The Kurds of Eriwan employ freemen as herdsmen34.Among the Tunguz the poor generally serve the rich, by whom they are badly treated35.Yakuts, who have less than one head of cattle per soul, must hire themselves out for wages36.Pallas says: “Every Samoyede has his reindeer and tends them himself with the help of his family, except the very rich who employ poor men as herdsmen.” Von Stenin also states that the poor serve the rich. The following anecdote, given by this writer, shows how strongly the desire of wealth influences psychical life among the Samoyedes. One of them depicted the delight of intoxication in these terms: “Spirits taste better than meat. When a man is drunk, he fancies he has many reindeer and thinks himself a merchant. But on coming to his senses he sees that he is poor and has just spent his last reindeer in drinking”37.Of the Koryakes we are told: “Before they were subjected[271]by the Russians, they had neither government nor magistrates; only the rich exercised some authority over the poor.” Their greatest pleasure consists in looking at their herds. The poor are employed in tending the herds of the rich for food and clothing; if they have themselves some reindeer, they are allowed to join them to their master’s herds and tend them together with the latter38.Among the Tuski, according to Georgi, the poor serve the rich as herdsmen39.In North-East Africa the state of things is not quite the same. The pastoral nomads here form the nobility, and tax subjected tribes with tributes and compulsory labour. Servants are not found here so often as in Asia. Sometimes, however, they are found. Thus among the Beni Amer there are herdsmen, maid-servants etc. who work for wages40. The same, perhaps, applies to the Massai, where the man who owns large herds and many wives, enjoys high consideration but a poor man is despised41.“Among all South African natives” says Fritsch “the rich tyrannize over the poor who, in the hope of filling their stomachs, comply with a state of dependence that is not authorized by law”42.Among the Caffres poor men place themselves under the protection of a rich head of a family, build their huts in his kraal, and in reward yield their cattle to him43.Kropf tells us that among the Ama-Xosa the consideration a man enjoys depends on the number of cattle he owns. The poor are fed by the chief and in return render him services44.The Ovaherero despise any one who has no cattle. The rich support many people, who become their dependents, and so they acquire distinction and power45. The children of impoverished families who, according to Andersson46, are kept as slaves, are perhaps rather to be called servants.Among those tribes which are mainly agricultural, but besides[272]subsist largely upon the produce of their cattle, similar phenomena present themselves.Among the Ossetes freemen are often employed as servants47.Among the Bechuanas the possession of cattle and a waggon is a mark of distinction. They mix their porridge with curdled milk, and therefore call a poor man a water-porridge man48.Casalis gives an elaborate description of the value which the Basutos attach to the possession of cattle. Wealth, among them, consists in cattle, and this wealth is the base of the power of the chiefs. By means of the produce of their herds they feed the poor, procure arms for the warriors, support the troops in war and entertain good relations with neighbouring nations. Were a chief to lose his cattle, his power would be at an end49.The Barotse employ as herdsmen young slaves and sons of poor men50.Among the Dinka every man upon an average owns three head of cattle; but there are also poor men, who are the slaves or servants of the rich51. We may safely infer that these “slaves or servants” are servants and not slaves.The sheikh of each Chillook tribe, according to Chaillé Long, detains as slaves those who do not own even a single cow52. Probably the same state of things prevails here as among the Caffres: these poor men are not slaves, but compelled by hunger to seek the protection of a rich man.In the country of the Gallas the value of labour is very small53.The Bogos employ freemen as herdsmen and peasants; they also keep maid-servants54.Among the Amahlubi there are herdsmen, who serve for wages55.We see that, wherever men subsist by cattle-breeding, a peculiar characteristic of economic life presents itself. This characteristic is not the existence of wealth; for wealth also exists among the tribes of the Pacific Coast of North America; yet on the Pacific Coast slave labour is of great use. It is the[273]existence of poverty. On the Pacific Coast the “abundant natural supplies in ocean, stream, and forest” enable each man, be he rich or not, to provide for himself; but among pastoral tribes the means of subsistence are the property of individuals; and those who own no cattle have no resource but to apply to the owners for support56. Therefore, if labourers are wanted, there are always freemen who readily offer their services; and there is no great use for slave labour57.So there is always a supply of labour. On the other hand, the demand for labour is small. There is but little work to be done. Among some pastoral tribes the men spend a great deal of time in idleness58.Prschewalsky, speaking of the Mongols, remarks: “Unlimited laziness is a main characteristic of the nomads; they spend their whole life in idleness, which is furthered by the character of pastoral nomadism. The tending of the cattle is the sole occupation of the Mongol, and this does not nearly require all his time. The guarding of cows and sheep is the business of the women and grown-up children; milking, creaming, butter-making and other domestic labour falls almost entirely to the share of the mistress of the house. The men generally do nothing, and from morning till night ride from onejurt(tent) to another, drinkingkoumissand chattering with their neighbours. The chase, which the nomads are passionately fond of, serves mainly as a pastime.”The Altaians have to survey the cattle; this consists only in riding a few times a day to the herds, and driving them together. The milking of the mares during the summer, which requires some courage, is also the men’s business.Among the Aeneze Bedouins the men’s sole business is feeding the horses, and in the evening milking the camels59.[274]The Kazak Kirghiz, too, are very lazy. They pass a great part of the summer sleeping because of the warmth; and in winter-time they hardly ever leave their tents, because the snow covers the roads. As they are not acquainted with any arts, and the tending of the cattle is their only occupation, there is no need for much work60.Rowney tells us of the Mairs and Meenas of Rajpootana: “The ostensible occupation followed by them was that of goatherds; but the herds were usually left to the charge of their boys and old men, while the more able-bodied spent their time, mounted on their ponies, in marauding, plundering, and murdering”61.Among the Massai the men despise every kind of work. Only warfare is considered an occupation worthy of a man62.It has to be remarked that most of these tribes do not keep slaves; so it is not by imposing all the work upon slaves that the men are enabled to pass their time in idleness; yet they do almost nothing. “The herdsman is lazy,” says Schmoller63, and Schurtz speaks of the aversion from all hard and regular work, which characterizes the pastoral nomads64. This proves that but little labour is wanted. One might object, that perhaps women and boys are overworked. But the fact that the able-bodied men, who form a considerable part of the community, can afford to take life so very easily, sufficiently proves that the total amount of labour required is rather small.Here we find one more reason why pastoral tribes have little use for slave labour. The demand for labour is small; therefore, even if free labourers were not available, only a few slaves would be wanted. Capital is here the principal factor of production, labour holding a subordinate place. Among agricultural tribes, when there is a practically unlimited supply of fertile soil, every person whose labour is available to the tribe can cultivate a piece of ground, and so, the more people there are, the more food can be produced. But among pastoral tribes, as soon as there are people enough within the tribe to guard the cattle, milk the cows, and do the other[275]work required, an increase in the number of labourers is not profitable. There is only a limited demand for labour; therefore, though there may be a temporary scarcity of labour which makes strengthening of the labour forces of the tribe by means of slaves desirable,—when a few slaves have been procured, the point at which a further increase in the number of people gives no profit will soon be reached again.We see that among pastoral tribes little labour is required; and such as is, is easy to procure; for there are always people destitute of capital, who offer themselves as labourers. Therefore slaves are economically of little use.There is, however, one description of a pastoral tribe, in which it is stated, that men as well as women have to work very hard. This is Geoffroy’s capital monography on the Larbas. The head of the family and his sons have to guard the herds, trace and dig pits, share in all operations common to the horsemen of the tribe: raids and battles, the pursuing of thieves, the defense of the pecuniary interests of the family, the depositing of merchandise in theksours(store-houses). The head of the family tends the sick animals, and has the administration of the wool and grain; but practically he will not have much to do with these matters, not considering them worth his attention. But a great part of his time is taken up with keeping watch and marching, and this makes his life a rather hard one. He does not sleep at night; he waters the cattle in the pits orr’dirs; he surrounds his tents with a protecting hedge, thezirba; he struggles against the elements, which often disperse beasts, tents and men. Daily, from the cradle to the tomb, the nomad’s life is a struggle for existence. As a child he already has to look after the cattle; he learns to ride on horseback with his father. When older, whether rich or poor, he has to learn, for several years, to conduct large numbers of cattle, which is a very difficult and dangerous work, to tend the different kinds of animals, to cure them, to sell them, to derive from them as much profit as possible. Pastoral art is more complicated than at first sight it seems, and comprehends a long series of accomplishments. At twenty years the nomad is an accomplished man, thoroughly acquainted with the life he has to lead, enjoying all the physical[276]strength indispensable in the exceptionalmilieuwhere he has to struggle. The two youngest sons of the head of the family our informant describes, 15 and 13 years of age, now perform in the family the duties of herdsmen. Daily occupations of master and slaves are the driving together of the dispersed animals, the tending of the females that have calved, the preparing of special food for the young animals, the dressing of the stronger ones for the saddle and pack-saddle, and the chase of hares and gazelles65.We see that pastoral life is not so easy here as on the fertile plains of Central Asia. But the work that is most necessary here, and also most difficult, is the care for the security of the tribe and its possessions, or, as Geoffroy very appropriately expresses it, “c’est un peu toujours comme la guerre”. And this work cannot be left to slaves; else the slaves would become the masters of the tribe. Warriors are wanted here; labourers not so much.We have now accounted for the non-existence of slavery among many pastoral tribes, and the little use of slave labour among pastoral tribes in general, by the principle laid down in the last paragraph, that, generally speaking, slaves are not wanted where subsistence depends upon capital.In North-East Africa, however, there is one more cause at work, making slavery superfluous. This is the existence of a kind ofsubstitute for slavery, viz.subjection of tribes as such. Pastoral tribes often levy tributes on agricultural tribes, to which they are superior in military strength; the latter cannot easily leave the lands they cultivate and seek a new country; if not too heavily oppressed, they will prefer paying a tribute. And to pastoral nomads the levying of a tax on agricultural tribes brings far more profit than the enslaving of individuals belonging to such tribes, whom they would have to employ either in pastoral labour, which they do not want, or in tilling the soil, which work the nomads would be unable to supervise. There are also pastoral tribes subjected by other pastoral nomads, the latter forming the nobility and the military part of society. Finally we find subjected tribes of hunters, smiths,[277]etc.; here we have sometimes rather to deal with a voluntary division of labour66.The Somal have several pariah castes. Among the Wer-Singellis in North Somaliland we find the following: 1º. Midgân, smiths and traders; these, by acquiring considerable wealth, sometimes win so much regard, that even a Somali noble deigns to marry his daughter to a Midgân. 2º. Tómal, who are employed by Somali nobles as servants, herdsmen and camel-drivers, and are also obliged to go to war. The noble Wer-Singelli carries sword and spear, whereas the Tomali uses bow and arrows; sometimes a Midgân girl is given him as a wife, but never the daughter of a noble Somali. The Tómal, however, belong to the tribe. 3º. Jibbir, who are very much despised. They have no fixed habitations; they roam in families over the country, from tribe to tribe, as jugglers and magic doctors. Everybody, for fear of sorcery, gives them food and presents, and in return receives from them amulets, made of stone and roots. They contract no marriage outside their own caste67.The Massai, true warriors and raiders, “keep a subjected tribe, the Wa-rombutta, who do their hunting and what meagre agriculture they indulge in. This tribe is insignificant in appearance, and although servile and subject to the Massai are not slaves; they present almost the appearance of dwarfs.” The Wandorobo too, according to Thomson, are regarded by the Massai as a kind of serfs, and treated accordingly; and Johnston calls them a helot race of hunters and smiths68.Among the Bogos “patronage results from military subjection or from the helpless state of separate immigrants with regard to a strong and closely united nation. As the nobles carefully trace their pedigrees, it is easy to find out the Tigres. Tigre means a man of Ethiopian extraction, who speaks the Tigre language. Some Tigre families, subjected from time immemorial, have immigrated together with the family of Gebre Terke [the legendary ancestor of the Bogos]. Others already lived in[278]the country, and unable to withstand the invasion, hastened to submit in order to be tolerated. The Bogos seem to have taken possession of the country in a very pacific and forbearing way, and unlike the Normans and other European invaders, do not interfere with the regulation of landed property, so that the ancient aborigines still own most of the land. The third class is composed of foreign families who, being for some reason unable to agree with their countrymen, settle in the country of the Bogos and place themselves under their protection, which still continually occurs. A member of the Boas family [i.e.of the Bogos nobility], however poor and weak, never becomes a Tigre; his origin is a guarantee of his independence. A Tigre, however mighty and rich, cannot become a Schmagilly [noble]; for the Tigres, who are a compound of various elements, cannot trace their origin so far back as the Schmagillies who pretend to spring all from the same ancestor. Moreover, the oppression is so slight, that a revolution is unimaginable”69.Among the Takue the state of the Tigres is the same as among the Bogos; formerly they brought beer to their lords; now they pay them a small tribute of corn and fat70.Marea Tigres have a harder lot. Two kinds of obligations are incumbent on them: towards their respective masters, and towards the nobilityen bloc. Even the poorest noble never becomes a Tigre, and does not perform degrading work, such as for instance milking. The Tigre pays his master yearly 8 bottles of fat, a measure of corn, and every week a leathern bag with milk. Of every cow killed by a Tigre the master receives a considerable portion; a cow belonging to a Tigre, which dies a natural death, falls entirely to the master. As for the Tigres’ obligations towards the nobility as a whole, on several occasions they have to give up their cattle for the nobility. Among the Black Marea the Tigres own most of the land; among the Red Marea the greater part of the land is in the hands of impoverished nobles, who live chiefly upon the rent of their landed property. Another class are the Dokono, who are obliged to choose a patron and pay a tribute, but[279]are held in rather high esteem and often marry daughters of the nobles; they own land and herds and are much given to trading71.Among the Beni Amer the same distinction, of nobles and subjects, prevails. The latter are called Woréza. “We shall speak of master and servant,” says Munzinger “though the latter term does not quite answer the purpose. The state of things we are going to describe much resembles that which we have met with among the aristocrats of the Anseba; among the Beni Amer, however, the servant is a feoffee rather than a protégé. But as he derives his wealth from his master, to whom he owes what we may call interest, his state is one of much greater dependence.… Among the Beni Amer it is an ancient custom, that a lord distributes his wealth among his servants;e.g.if he receives 100 cows as his portion of the spoils of war, he does not add them to his herd, but leaves them to his servants as a present. When the servant marries, the lord presents him with a camel. In every emergency the servant applies to his lord, who helps him whenever possible. All these presents become the true property of the recipient; the servant may do with them as he likes, sell and even spend them; the lord may upbraid him for it, but legally has nothing to do with it. On the death of the servant the presents devolve upon his heirs. But the lord has a kind of usufruct of these presents; the servant provides him with fat and daily brings him a certain quantity of milk,i.e.he feeds the lord and his family. Often has the lord to wait for his supper till midnight, because the servant provides for himself first. The servant, moreover, has to provide the funeral sacrifice for his lord and for every member of the latter’s family; he leaves to the lord every sterile cow, and when he kills a beast he brings him the breast-piece. He stands by his lord in every emergency, and even assists him according to his means towards paying the tribute”. The servant is, so to speak, a tenant of his lord. As the Beni Amer are nomads, there is no land to distribute; the pasture has no owner; therefore the fief can only consist in movable property. As most of the wealth of the country is[280]in the hands of the servants, they have a decisive voice in every public council; they have to find out where the best pastures are, where the camp has to be erected72.Similar phenomena present themselves outside North-East Africa.In the second chapter of Part I we have met with subjected tribes in South Africa, such as Fengu, Makalahiri, etc., sometimes called slaves by our ethnographers73.Geoffroy speaks of settled tribes being in some way the vassals of the Larbas. Theksoursare buildings in which the nomads preserve their corn, dates and wool; these stores are guarded by settled tribes, that permanently live there and receive one tenth of the preserved stock yearly. The nomads look upon all settled tribes as degenerate beings and inferiors74. Here we have to deal with a voluntary division of labour, rather than with subjection.In Circassia, according to Bell, the serfs are prisoners of war and the ancient inhabitants of the country. The latter are perhaps the same peasants who, according to Klaproth, may not be sold apart from the land75.It is remarkable, that in Central Asia and Siberia we do not find a single instance of this subjection of tribes as such76. This is probably the reason why in these parts members of the tribe are so often employed as servants.Where nearly all work is left to subjected tribes or castes, and the nobles do nothing but fight, there is not much use for slave labour. The nobles do not want slaves, because all work required by them is performed by their subjects.We have now found a new cause, from which in some cases slaves are not wanted: the subjection of tribes as such, which serves as a substitute for slavery.

The number of these tribes is not large, as they are found in a few parts of the world only. Moreover, the descriptions available to us were in many cases too incomplete to justify any inference as to their having or not having slaves.

The clear cases noticed by us are the following.

Positive cases.Arabia:Aeneze Bedouins,Larbas.2Caucasus:Circassians,Kabards.2Bantu tribes:Ovaherero,Bahima.2Hamitic group:Beduan,Beni Amer,Somal,Danakil.410Negative cases.India:Todas.1Central Asia:Kazak Kirghiz,Altaians,Turkomans.3Siberia:Samoyedes,Tunguz,Yakuts,nomadic Koryakes.4[263]Bantu tribes:Ama-Xosa,Ama-Zulu,some divisions of the Mundombe.3Hamatic group:Massai.112

We see that there are almost as many positive as negative cases. So those theorists are wrong, who hold that the taming of animals naturally leads to the taming of men1.

It might, however, be that the non-existence of slavery in our negative cases were due to a special, external cause, viz. that these tribes were so inclosed between more powerful nations as not to be able to procure slaves, though slaves would be of much use to them. A brief survey of the political state of these tribes shows that they are not all in this position. The Kazak Kirghiz, in Levchine’s time, kidnapped slaves whom they sold abroad. The Massai are very warlike and adopt captives. The Turkomans are “the intermediate agents for carrying on the slave-trade”2. The Ama-Xosa and Ama-Zulu are also very warlike3. We see that there are some pastoral tribes that, though able to procure slaves, do not keep any. The non-existence of slavery among them must be due to other, more internal, causes.

It might also be that our positive cases were exceptions to a general rule. For many pastoral tribes, though subsisting mainly by cattle-breeding, carry on agriculture besides. If these only kept slaves, and employed them chiefly in work connected with agriculture, slavery would prove foreign to pastoral nomadism as such; for then these tribes would only keep slaves in their quality as agriculturists.

We shall inquire whether this be so; and for this purpose we shall give a survey of the work imposed upon slaves among pastoral tribes. This survey, besides enabling us to decide upon the question at issue, will show what place slavery occupies in pastoral life.

Among the Larbas the boys (also free boys) guard the cattle[264]on the pasture-ground, whereas the work that requires more skill (the tending of young animals, the breaking of horses, etc.) is equally divided between master and slaves4.

Circassian slaves, according to Bell, till the soil, tend the cattle and perform domestic labour. Klaproth, however, states that the peasants may only be sold together with the land; so they are rather a kind of serfs. Domestic slaves may be sold separately5.

According to Roscoe, among the Bahima, “the women’s duties are to wash the milk pots, perhaps it would be better to say see the pots are washed, because the work generally falls upon the slaves to perform”6.

Munzinger speaks of domestic labour being imposed on slaves by the Beduan. Most of these slaves are women7.

Among the Beni Amer it is considered an honour to have many slaves. “Properly speaking slaves serve their master only when children. Adult female slaves are concubines, live with their master, but are exempt from nearly all labour; adult male slaves generally despise all work, and belong to the retinue of the master. The master derives no real profit from his slaves.” According to Von Müller the fabrication of tar falls to the share of the slave, such work being below the dignity of a freeman8.

Paulitschke tells us that among the nomadic Somal and Danakil slavery is not profitable; for the territories inhabited by them are thinly peopled, agriculture is insignificant, and these cattle-breeders get their subsistence rather easily; moreover they would be unable to support a considerable number of slaves by the produce of their cattle. Therefore among the Danakil on the river Aussa and the Rahanwîn Somal on the lower Wêbi-Schabêli, where slaves are employed in agriculture, there is more use for slave labour. Among the nomadic Somal and Danakil slaves appear also to be employed in warfare. According to Bottego, whose account applies to the Somal of the towns, adult male slaves till the soil, build houses, and perform the rudest and most fatiguing kinds of work. The[265]boys lead the cattle to the pasture-ground; the women are employed in household work and often are concubines of their masters9.

There are some tribes that subsist mainly on agriculture, but also, to a great extent, on cattle-breeding. It may be of some use to give a survey of the work done by slaves, among them too; it will appear, then, whether they keep their slaves for agricultural purposes only, or employ them also for pastoral work.

Among the Kafirs some slaves are blacksmiths. In war a slave boy beats the drum10. Our informant speaks only incidentally of slave labour; he does not mean to say that this is the only work performed by slaves.

Among the Barotse young slaves are given as pages to the children of freemen. Slaves till the soil and tend the cattle; slave boys are employed as herdsmen11.

In a description of the Waganda it is said: “One of the principal evils resulting from slavery in Uganda is that it causes all manual labour to be looked upon as derogatory to the dignity of a free man”12.

Among the Mandingoes native-born slaves enjoy much liberty; they tend the cattle, and go to war, even without their masters. Freemen work as much as slaves. Every Mandingo, to whatever class he belongs, is occupied in agriculture. The tending of horses is incumbent on slave boys13.

Hildebrandt states that the occupations of the Sakalavas are not many. In North Sakalavaland, however, rice is cultivated for export, and so there is more labour wanted here; therefore in this district slavery prevails to a large extent14.

Among the Bogos there are hardly 200 slaves (whereas Munzinger estimates the total population at 8400). Slaves are of little use to their owners. Male slaves live separately and generally take to robbery. Female slaves, having no opportunity to marry, become prostitutes and live rather independently15.[266]

The Takue have very few slaves. In their laws and customs they show a close resemblance to the Bogos16.

Among the pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu agriculture is incumbent on slaves. The slaves also share in their masters’ slave-raids. Jansen gives some more details about the work of slaves in the Sulu Islands. The ordinary occupations of slaves are agriculture, fishing, manufacture of salt, trade, and domestic work17.

The slaves of the Geges and Nagos of Porto Novo are chiefly employed in agriculture18.

Among the Ossetes the slaves perform household work; the peasants are serfs19.

The slaves captured and purchased by the Gallas are generally sold to foreign traders; in large households they are sometimes retained and employed in various kinds of work. In another place our informant states that most slaves are employed in agriculture20.

Yoruba slaves are employed in trade and warfare21.

We see that slaves are employed in agriculture among the agricultural Somal and Danakil, Fulbe, Barotse, Mandingoes, Sakalavas, pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu, Geges and Nagos, Gallas; and very probably also among the Waganda, where they perform “all manual labour.” As the details given by our ethnographers are not always complete, it is possible that in some more cases slaves are employed in agriculture. But it is sufficiently clear, that among the Beni Amer, nomadic Somal and Danakil, Bogos, and probably also among the Beduan and Takue, slaves do not till the soil. Among the Ossetes and Circassians the peasants are serfs, slaves being employed in household work. What work is incumbent on slaves among the Aeneze Bedouins we are not told; but agriculture seems to be unknown among them. Among the Larbas the daily work is equally divided between master and slaves, agriculture holding a very subordinate place. Hence it appears that several of these tribes keep slaves, though they do not[267]employ them in agriculture; pastoral tribes, as such, sometimes keep slaves.

But another inference we can draw from the foregoing survey of slave labour is this. Where slaves are not employed in agriculture or in such other work as requires a settled life (e.g.house-building among the Somal of the towns, fishing and manufacture of salt among the pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu), the use of slave labour is not great. Among the Beni Amer, Bogos, and nomadic Somal and Danakil slave-keeping is stated to be a mere luxury. The Sakalavas, except in the rice-exporting district, do not want much slave labour. And only in one case, viz. among the Larbas, is it clearly stated that the chief business of slaves is pastoral work.

This tends to prove, thatamong true pastoral tribes slavery, as a system of labour, is of little moment. This inference is verified by several statements about slaves being often manumitted or in the course of time becoming practically free.

Burckhardt, speaking of the slaves of the Aeneze Bedouins, says: “After a certain lapse of time they are always emancipated, and married to persons of their own colour”22.

Among the Circassians slaves are often manumitted. A slave can also purchase his freedom, and then becomes a member of a Circassian fraternity23.

The Beni Amer have two kinds of slaves, newly-purchased and native-born. “Their condition differs so much, that only the former may properly be called slaves; the latter are rather serfs. The newly-purchased slave is treated like every Mohammedan slave, he may be sold and does not yet belong to the family. The native-born slave has only the name, not the state of a slave; this appears from his being allowed to intermarry with the Woreza (subjected class). The children born of such a marriage are considered free, as they descend from a free mother. In Barka the Kishendoa,i.e.native-born slaves, who inhabit a camp of tents of their own, are governed by a chief who is one of their own number, and intermarry with the Woreza. Native-born slaves may live where they like and have the same right of inheritance as freemen; only if such[268]a slave leaves no relatives does the master succeed to his goods.… In the blood-feud too the native-born slave is in a peculiar condition. If a newly-purchased slave is killed, his price is restored to his owner; for such a slave is looked upon as an article of trade. The native-born slave, however, belongs to the family; therefore his blood requires blood; he is avenged by his relatives if there are such, and otherwise by his master; if this is not practicable because the murderer is a man of power, the matter is hushed up; but a compensation is never given”24.

The Somal often buy slaves whom they manumit soon afterwards25.

Among the Kafirs of India each tribe is governed by a council. Even slaves can be elected as members of this council26.

Our survey of the work done by slaves shows in the third place, that slaves are often employed in warfare. This will be accounted for later on.

Here we have only to emphasize the fact, that to pastoral tribes as such slave labour is of little use. This makes it easy to understand why so many of them dispense with slavery altogether.

Going on to inquire what is the cause of this phenomenon, we may remember the general conclusion we have arrived at in the last paragraph, viz. that slave labour is of little use, where subsistence is either dependent on capital, or very difficult to procure. Now it is easy to see that among pastoral tribes subsistence entirely depends on capital. Among people who live upon the produce of their cattle, a man who owns no cattle,i.e.no capital, has no means of subsistence. Accordingly, among pastoral tribes we find rich and poor men; and the poor often offer themselves as labourers to the rich27.

Among the Syrian Bedouins “to every tent, or to every two or three tents, there is a shepherd or person to attend the cattle, either a younger son or servant; he receives wages for ten months”28.[269]

Among the Larbas alms are given to the poor. The social rank of the head of a family depends on the number of his children, his practical knowledge of the pastoral art, and his wealth. There are free labourers who are paid in kind. Herdsmen have the usufruct of a part of the herds they tend. Generally the labourer takes a tenth in kind at the close of the time agreed upon; moreover he receives his daily food during the time of his engagement29.

Levchine, speaking of the Kazak Kirghiz, tells us: “Once I asked a Kirghiz, owner of 8000 horses, why he did not sell every year a part of his stud. He answered: “Why should I sell that which is my pleasure? I want no money; if I had any, I should be obliged to shut it up in a box, where nobody would see it; but when my steeds run over the steppe everybody looks at them; everybody knows that they are mine; and people always remember that I am rich.” In this manner is the reputation of being a rich man acquired throughout the hordes; such is the wealth that procures them the regard of their countrymen and the title ofbaï(rich man), which sometimes gives them an ascendency over the offspring of the khans and the most deserving old men.” On the other hand the number of beggars is very considerable. Levchine makes no mention of servants; but Radloff, who about thirty years later visited the Kazak Kirghiz, says: “There exists here a class of servants, whom I found in every well-to-do family. The herds are generally tended by hired herdsmen, who are subjected to a kind of supervision.” The rich also engage poor families to till their lands. A man who loses all his cattle has no resource left but to offer himself as a labourer30.

The same first-rate ethnographer informs us that among the Altaians “rich and poor eat the same kind of food; the difference is only in the size of the kettle and the quantity of food. The poor man eats what he has got, which most frequently is very little; and he would starve but that the rich have such an abundance of food, that in summer they readily entertain whoever comes to theirjurts(tents).” When a beast[270]is being killed, the poor neighbours in large numbers throng towards the place and try to secure those portions of the bowels that the rich disdain; they have to fight for them with the dogs, who are equally fond of the delicacies. When all guests have been served, pieces of meat are thrown towards the door, where poor men and dogs try to secure them. The picked bones are also thrown to the poor, who clean them so thoroughly that nothing but the bare bone is left to the dogs. The cattle of the rich are generally tended by poor neighbours, who live in the vicinity of the rich, partake of their food, and receive their worn clothes. Young girls often seek employment as servants; orphans of poor men also serve the rich31.

Among the Kalmucks there are poor people who serve the rich as herdsmen32.

Prschewalsky states that rich Mongols, who own thousands of beasts, employ herdsmen who are poor and have no relations33.

The Kurds of Eriwan employ freemen as herdsmen34.

Among the Tunguz the poor generally serve the rich, by whom they are badly treated35.

Yakuts, who have less than one head of cattle per soul, must hire themselves out for wages36.

Pallas says: “Every Samoyede has his reindeer and tends them himself with the help of his family, except the very rich who employ poor men as herdsmen.” Von Stenin also states that the poor serve the rich. The following anecdote, given by this writer, shows how strongly the desire of wealth influences psychical life among the Samoyedes. One of them depicted the delight of intoxication in these terms: “Spirits taste better than meat. When a man is drunk, he fancies he has many reindeer and thinks himself a merchant. But on coming to his senses he sees that he is poor and has just spent his last reindeer in drinking”37.

Of the Koryakes we are told: “Before they were subjected[271]by the Russians, they had neither government nor magistrates; only the rich exercised some authority over the poor.” Their greatest pleasure consists in looking at their herds. The poor are employed in tending the herds of the rich for food and clothing; if they have themselves some reindeer, they are allowed to join them to their master’s herds and tend them together with the latter38.

Among the Tuski, according to Georgi, the poor serve the rich as herdsmen39.

In North-East Africa the state of things is not quite the same. The pastoral nomads here form the nobility, and tax subjected tribes with tributes and compulsory labour. Servants are not found here so often as in Asia. Sometimes, however, they are found. Thus among the Beni Amer there are herdsmen, maid-servants etc. who work for wages40. The same, perhaps, applies to the Massai, where the man who owns large herds and many wives, enjoys high consideration but a poor man is despised41.

“Among all South African natives” says Fritsch “the rich tyrannize over the poor who, in the hope of filling their stomachs, comply with a state of dependence that is not authorized by law”42.

Among the Caffres poor men place themselves under the protection of a rich head of a family, build their huts in his kraal, and in reward yield their cattle to him43.

Kropf tells us that among the Ama-Xosa the consideration a man enjoys depends on the number of cattle he owns. The poor are fed by the chief and in return render him services44.

The Ovaherero despise any one who has no cattle. The rich support many people, who become their dependents, and so they acquire distinction and power45. The children of impoverished families who, according to Andersson46, are kept as slaves, are perhaps rather to be called servants.

Among those tribes which are mainly agricultural, but besides[272]subsist largely upon the produce of their cattle, similar phenomena present themselves.

Among the Ossetes freemen are often employed as servants47.

Among the Bechuanas the possession of cattle and a waggon is a mark of distinction. They mix their porridge with curdled milk, and therefore call a poor man a water-porridge man48.

Casalis gives an elaborate description of the value which the Basutos attach to the possession of cattle. Wealth, among them, consists in cattle, and this wealth is the base of the power of the chiefs. By means of the produce of their herds they feed the poor, procure arms for the warriors, support the troops in war and entertain good relations with neighbouring nations. Were a chief to lose his cattle, his power would be at an end49.

The Barotse employ as herdsmen young slaves and sons of poor men50.

Among the Dinka every man upon an average owns three head of cattle; but there are also poor men, who are the slaves or servants of the rich51. We may safely infer that these “slaves or servants” are servants and not slaves.

The sheikh of each Chillook tribe, according to Chaillé Long, detains as slaves those who do not own even a single cow52. Probably the same state of things prevails here as among the Caffres: these poor men are not slaves, but compelled by hunger to seek the protection of a rich man.

In the country of the Gallas the value of labour is very small53.

The Bogos employ freemen as herdsmen and peasants; they also keep maid-servants54.

Among the Amahlubi there are herdsmen, who serve for wages55.

We see that, wherever men subsist by cattle-breeding, a peculiar characteristic of economic life presents itself. This characteristic is not the existence of wealth; for wealth also exists among the tribes of the Pacific Coast of North America; yet on the Pacific Coast slave labour is of great use. It is the[273]existence of poverty. On the Pacific Coast the “abundant natural supplies in ocean, stream, and forest” enable each man, be he rich or not, to provide for himself; but among pastoral tribes the means of subsistence are the property of individuals; and those who own no cattle have no resource but to apply to the owners for support56. Therefore, if labourers are wanted, there are always freemen who readily offer their services; and there is no great use for slave labour57.

So there is always a supply of labour. On the other hand, the demand for labour is small. There is but little work to be done. Among some pastoral tribes the men spend a great deal of time in idleness58.

Prschewalsky, speaking of the Mongols, remarks: “Unlimited laziness is a main characteristic of the nomads; they spend their whole life in idleness, which is furthered by the character of pastoral nomadism. The tending of the cattle is the sole occupation of the Mongol, and this does not nearly require all his time. The guarding of cows and sheep is the business of the women and grown-up children; milking, creaming, butter-making and other domestic labour falls almost entirely to the share of the mistress of the house. The men generally do nothing, and from morning till night ride from onejurt(tent) to another, drinkingkoumissand chattering with their neighbours. The chase, which the nomads are passionately fond of, serves mainly as a pastime.”

The Altaians have to survey the cattle; this consists only in riding a few times a day to the herds, and driving them together. The milking of the mares during the summer, which requires some courage, is also the men’s business.

Among the Aeneze Bedouins the men’s sole business is feeding the horses, and in the evening milking the camels59.[274]

The Kazak Kirghiz, too, are very lazy. They pass a great part of the summer sleeping because of the warmth; and in winter-time they hardly ever leave their tents, because the snow covers the roads. As they are not acquainted with any arts, and the tending of the cattle is their only occupation, there is no need for much work60.

Rowney tells us of the Mairs and Meenas of Rajpootana: “The ostensible occupation followed by them was that of goatherds; but the herds were usually left to the charge of their boys and old men, while the more able-bodied spent their time, mounted on their ponies, in marauding, plundering, and murdering”61.

Among the Massai the men despise every kind of work. Only warfare is considered an occupation worthy of a man62.

It has to be remarked that most of these tribes do not keep slaves; so it is not by imposing all the work upon slaves that the men are enabled to pass their time in idleness; yet they do almost nothing. “The herdsman is lazy,” says Schmoller63, and Schurtz speaks of the aversion from all hard and regular work, which characterizes the pastoral nomads64. This proves that but little labour is wanted. One might object, that perhaps women and boys are overworked. But the fact that the able-bodied men, who form a considerable part of the community, can afford to take life so very easily, sufficiently proves that the total amount of labour required is rather small.

Here we find one more reason why pastoral tribes have little use for slave labour. The demand for labour is small; therefore, even if free labourers were not available, only a few slaves would be wanted. Capital is here the principal factor of production, labour holding a subordinate place. Among agricultural tribes, when there is a practically unlimited supply of fertile soil, every person whose labour is available to the tribe can cultivate a piece of ground, and so, the more people there are, the more food can be produced. But among pastoral tribes, as soon as there are people enough within the tribe to guard the cattle, milk the cows, and do the other[275]work required, an increase in the number of labourers is not profitable. There is only a limited demand for labour; therefore, though there may be a temporary scarcity of labour which makes strengthening of the labour forces of the tribe by means of slaves desirable,—when a few slaves have been procured, the point at which a further increase in the number of people gives no profit will soon be reached again.

We see that among pastoral tribes little labour is required; and such as is, is easy to procure; for there are always people destitute of capital, who offer themselves as labourers. Therefore slaves are economically of little use.

There is, however, one description of a pastoral tribe, in which it is stated, that men as well as women have to work very hard. This is Geoffroy’s capital monography on the Larbas. The head of the family and his sons have to guard the herds, trace and dig pits, share in all operations common to the horsemen of the tribe: raids and battles, the pursuing of thieves, the defense of the pecuniary interests of the family, the depositing of merchandise in theksours(store-houses). The head of the family tends the sick animals, and has the administration of the wool and grain; but practically he will not have much to do with these matters, not considering them worth his attention. But a great part of his time is taken up with keeping watch and marching, and this makes his life a rather hard one. He does not sleep at night; he waters the cattle in the pits orr’dirs; he surrounds his tents with a protecting hedge, thezirba; he struggles against the elements, which often disperse beasts, tents and men. Daily, from the cradle to the tomb, the nomad’s life is a struggle for existence. As a child he already has to look after the cattle; he learns to ride on horseback with his father. When older, whether rich or poor, he has to learn, for several years, to conduct large numbers of cattle, which is a very difficult and dangerous work, to tend the different kinds of animals, to cure them, to sell them, to derive from them as much profit as possible. Pastoral art is more complicated than at first sight it seems, and comprehends a long series of accomplishments. At twenty years the nomad is an accomplished man, thoroughly acquainted with the life he has to lead, enjoying all the physical[276]strength indispensable in the exceptionalmilieuwhere he has to struggle. The two youngest sons of the head of the family our informant describes, 15 and 13 years of age, now perform in the family the duties of herdsmen. Daily occupations of master and slaves are the driving together of the dispersed animals, the tending of the females that have calved, the preparing of special food for the young animals, the dressing of the stronger ones for the saddle and pack-saddle, and the chase of hares and gazelles65.

We see that pastoral life is not so easy here as on the fertile plains of Central Asia. But the work that is most necessary here, and also most difficult, is the care for the security of the tribe and its possessions, or, as Geoffroy very appropriately expresses it, “c’est un peu toujours comme la guerre”. And this work cannot be left to slaves; else the slaves would become the masters of the tribe. Warriors are wanted here; labourers not so much.

We have now accounted for the non-existence of slavery among many pastoral tribes, and the little use of slave labour among pastoral tribes in general, by the principle laid down in the last paragraph, that, generally speaking, slaves are not wanted where subsistence depends upon capital.

In North-East Africa, however, there is one more cause at work, making slavery superfluous. This is the existence of a kind ofsubstitute for slavery, viz.subjection of tribes as such. Pastoral tribes often levy tributes on agricultural tribes, to which they are superior in military strength; the latter cannot easily leave the lands they cultivate and seek a new country; if not too heavily oppressed, they will prefer paying a tribute. And to pastoral nomads the levying of a tax on agricultural tribes brings far more profit than the enslaving of individuals belonging to such tribes, whom they would have to employ either in pastoral labour, which they do not want, or in tilling the soil, which work the nomads would be unable to supervise. There are also pastoral tribes subjected by other pastoral nomads, the latter forming the nobility and the military part of society. Finally we find subjected tribes of hunters, smiths,[277]etc.; here we have sometimes rather to deal with a voluntary division of labour66.

The Somal have several pariah castes. Among the Wer-Singellis in North Somaliland we find the following: 1º. Midgân, smiths and traders; these, by acquiring considerable wealth, sometimes win so much regard, that even a Somali noble deigns to marry his daughter to a Midgân. 2º. Tómal, who are employed by Somali nobles as servants, herdsmen and camel-drivers, and are also obliged to go to war. The noble Wer-Singelli carries sword and spear, whereas the Tomali uses bow and arrows; sometimes a Midgân girl is given him as a wife, but never the daughter of a noble Somali. The Tómal, however, belong to the tribe. 3º. Jibbir, who are very much despised. They have no fixed habitations; they roam in families over the country, from tribe to tribe, as jugglers and magic doctors. Everybody, for fear of sorcery, gives them food and presents, and in return receives from them amulets, made of stone and roots. They contract no marriage outside their own caste67.

The Massai, true warriors and raiders, “keep a subjected tribe, the Wa-rombutta, who do their hunting and what meagre agriculture they indulge in. This tribe is insignificant in appearance, and although servile and subject to the Massai are not slaves; they present almost the appearance of dwarfs.” The Wandorobo too, according to Thomson, are regarded by the Massai as a kind of serfs, and treated accordingly; and Johnston calls them a helot race of hunters and smiths68.

Among the Bogos “patronage results from military subjection or from the helpless state of separate immigrants with regard to a strong and closely united nation. As the nobles carefully trace their pedigrees, it is easy to find out the Tigres. Tigre means a man of Ethiopian extraction, who speaks the Tigre language. Some Tigre families, subjected from time immemorial, have immigrated together with the family of Gebre Terke [the legendary ancestor of the Bogos]. Others already lived in[278]the country, and unable to withstand the invasion, hastened to submit in order to be tolerated. The Bogos seem to have taken possession of the country in a very pacific and forbearing way, and unlike the Normans and other European invaders, do not interfere with the regulation of landed property, so that the ancient aborigines still own most of the land. The third class is composed of foreign families who, being for some reason unable to agree with their countrymen, settle in the country of the Bogos and place themselves under their protection, which still continually occurs. A member of the Boas family [i.e.of the Bogos nobility], however poor and weak, never becomes a Tigre; his origin is a guarantee of his independence. A Tigre, however mighty and rich, cannot become a Schmagilly [noble]; for the Tigres, who are a compound of various elements, cannot trace their origin so far back as the Schmagillies who pretend to spring all from the same ancestor. Moreover, the oppression is so slight, that a revolution is unimaginable”69.

Among the Takue the state of the Tigres is the same as among the Bogos; formerly they brought beer to their lords; now they pay them a small tribute of corn and fat70.

Marea Tigres have a harder lot. Two kinds of obligations are incumbent on them: towards their respective masters, and towards the nobilityen bloc. Even the poorest noble never becomes a Tigre, and does not perform degrading work, such as for instance milking. The Tigre pays his master yearly 8 bottles of fat, a measure of corn, and every week a leathern bag with milk. Of every cow killed by a Tigre the master receives a considerable portion; a cow belonging to a Tigre, which dies a natural death, falls entirely to the master. As for the Tigres’ obligations towards the nobility as a whole, on several occasions they have to give up their cattle for the nobility. Among the Black Marea the Tigres own most of the land; among the Red Marea the greater part of the land is in the hands of impoverished nobles, who live chiefly upon the rent of their landed property. Another class are the Dokono, who are obliged to choose a patron and pay a tribute, but[279]are held in rather high esteem and often marry daughters of the nobles; they own land and herds and are much given to trading71.

Among the Beni Amer the same distinction, of nobles and subjects, prevails. The latter are called Woréza. “We shall speak of master and servant,” says Munzinger “though the latter term does not quite answer the purpose. The state of things we are going to describe much resembles that which we have met with among the aristocrats of the Anseba; among the Beni Amer, however, the servant is a feoffee rather than a protégé. But as he derives his wealth from his master, to whom he owes what we may call interest, his state is one of much greater dependence.… Among the Beni Amer it is an ancient custom, that a lord distributes his wealth among his servants;e.g.if he receives 100 cows as his portion of the spoils of war, he does not add them to his herd, but leaves them to his servants as a present. When the servant marries, the lord presents him with a camel. In every emergency the servant applies to his lord, who helps him whenever possible. All these presents become the true property of the recipient; the servant may do with them as he likes, sell and even spend them; the lord may upbraid him for it, but legally has nothing to do with it. On the death of the servant the presents devolve upon his heirs. But the lord has a kind of usufruct of these presents; the servant provides him with fat and daily brings him a certain quantity of milk,i.e.he feeds the lord and his family. Often has the lord to wait for his supper till midnight, because the servant provides for himself first. The servant, moreover, has to provide the funeral sacrifice for his lord and for every member of the latter’s family; he leaves to the lord every sterile cow, and when he kills a beast he brings him the breast-piece. He stands by his lord in every emergency, and even assists him according to his means towards paying the tribute”. The servant is, so to speak, a tenant of his lord. As the Beni Amer are nomads, there is no land to distribute; the pasture has no owner; therefore the fief can only consist in movable property. As most of the wealth of the country is[280]in the hands of the servants, they have a decisive voice in every public council; they have to find out where the best pastures are, where the camp has to be erected72.

Similar phenomena present themselves outside North-East Africa.

In the second chapter of Part I we have met with subjected tribes in South Africa, such as Fengu, Makalahiri, etc., sometimes called slaves by our ethnographers73.

Geoffroy speaks of settled tribes being in some way the vassals of the Larbas. Theksoursare buildings in which the nomads preserve their corn, dates and wool; these stores are guarded by settled tribes, that permanently live there and receive one tenth of the preserved stock yearly. The nomads look upon all settled tribes as degenerate beings and inferiors74. Here we have to deal with a voluntary division of labour, rather than with subjection.

In Circassia, according to Bell, the serfs are prisoners of war and the ancient inhabitants of the country. The latter are perhaps the same peasants who, according to Klaproth, may not be sold apart from the land75.

It is remarkable, that in Central Asia and Siberia we do not find a single instance of this subjection of tribes as such76. This is probably the reason why in these parts members of the tribe are so often employed as servants.

Where nearly all work is left to subjected tribes or castes, and the nobles do nothing but fight, there is not much use for slave labour. The nobles do not want slaves, because all work required by them is performed by their subjects.

We have now found a new cause, from which in some cases slaves are not wanted: the subjection of tribes as such, which serves as a substitute for slavery.

[Contents]§ 2.Slavery among pastoral tribes.Yet several pastoral tribes keep slaves; this has still to be[281]accounted for. We shall inquire first, whether thesecondary causeswe have found in the last paragraph are at work here.1º.Condition of women.On the Pacific Coast of North America the men sometimes procure slaves, in order to relieve the women of a part of their task. There are some details on record suggestive of the same state of things among some pastoral tribes. Among the Circassians, Bahima and Beduan (pastoral tribes), Waganda, pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu, Ossetes and Gallas (agricultural tribes depending largely on cattle for their subsistence), slaves are employed for household work. The same is the case with female slaves among the Larbas and Somal of the towns. Munzinger states that only few Beduan are rich enough to keep a female slave or a maid-servant; therefore in most families the preparing of food falls to the share of the wife, this being almost her only occupation77. Hence we may infer that among the Beduan, and probably among some other tribes, slaves are procured by the men for the benefit of the women.2º.Preserving of food.This does not seem to require much labour among pastoral tribes. On the Pacific Coast of North America the fish have to be prepared for winter use. But where men live upon the products of their cattle, food is not at one time much more abundant than at another.3º.Trade and industry.Household work, sometimes performed by slaves, does not seem to serve the purposes of trade, as on the Pacific Coast; there is not a single detail on record, that would lead us to suppose that it does. We even find particulars tending to prove the contrary. Among the Beni Amer, who have many slaves, the women are continually occupied in making mats, the proceeds of which labour are often sufficient to pay the tribute to the Turks78. Slaves do not seem to join in this occupation.Among the Larbas free women manufacture tissues, which are sold abroad79. Probably slaves are not capable of performing such fine work.Among the Yorubas and pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu[282]the slaves are occupied in trading. But these tribes are not nomadic; moreover, these slaves do not, like the slaves on the Pacific Coast, prepare the articles of commerce, but are themselves the traders, which is quite another thing.4º.Slaves wanted as warriors.Slaves sometimes serve to augment the military strength of the community. From the survey of the work done by slaves, given in the beginning of this chapter, it appears that they are often employed in warfare, viz. among the nomadic Somal and Danakil, Kafirs, pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu, Mandingoes and Yorubas; probably also among the Bogos, where they generally take to robbery. Circassian slaves cannot be compelled to go to war80. Hence it seems to follow that they may go if they like. Among the Beni Amer native-born slaves are avenged by their own relatives; so these slaves are armed, and probably fight together with their masters.The ensuing statement strikingly shows how highly slaves are valued as warriors among the nomadic Somal and Danakil. If a slave kills one enemy, he becomes free; if two or more, he is entitled to being adopted. Having killed ten enemies, he becomes a person of rank and enjoys many privileges81.In these cases slaves strengthen the military force of the tribe. But the tribe profits only indirectly by this reinforcement of the family. Most pastoral nomads live in comparatively small groups, rather independently; there is no strong central government82. And where quarrels between these small groups are frequent, the more numerous the family (in the wider sense, the Romanfamilia, including slaves), the better will the head of the family be able to maintain his position83. And pastoral nomads have always a great motive for fighting: they can enrich themselves by a successful raid. Among hunting, fishing, and agricultural tribes, if the conqueror does not want to keep the vanquished as slaves, war gives little profit84. But[283]in the raids pastoral nomads make on each other, the successful raider may acquire numerous herds,i.e.great wealth. Therefore it is of the utmost importance for a man to have as numerous afamiliaas possible.When speaking of the Larbas, we have seen that their mode of life isun peu toujours comme la guerre. Their describer states: “Theft is the most threatening evil the nomad has to deal with; he is therefore most severe in suppressing it, the punishment being invariably death.” He also speaks of free servants, members of the family, who live under the protection and at the expense of some rich head of a family; they are generally very numerous, and form a body of clients that strengthens their patron’s power85.Levchine, speaking of the Kazak Kirghiz, says: “Their feuds are caused by the unrestrained desire for plunder, that ruins and entirely demoralizes them; this plundering is calledbaranta, Thesebarantasconsist in reciprocal cattle-stealing, from which often sanguinary combats result.… And we must not think that public hatred or contempt falls on those who are addicted to these horrible excesses; on the contrary, they enjoy a reputation for bravery, and are distinguished by the name ofBatyrorBoghatyr, which name spreads through all the hordes the fame of their exploits. Many of these braves, calledBatyrfor their plundering ardour, though many years dead, still live in the remembrance of their countrymen, and their names are celebrated.” Accordingly, one of the qualities required in a chief is a large family, that gives him the power to maintain his authority86.Among the Beni Amer, where it seems to be quite an ordinary thing for a noble to receive 100 cows as his portion of the spoils of war, it is a great support for a man to have many children, as in these countries family is opposed to family87.A writer of the 18thcentury tells us that “the Chukchi who live to the north of the river Anadir, are not subjected to the Russian empire, and often make raids on those brought under Russian control, on the Koryakes as well as on the Chukchi,[284]killing or making prisoners all they meet, and carrying off their herds of reindeer”88.Among the Somal and Gallas internal wars are very frequent; among the former most wars are marauding expeditions. And here too the possession of wife and children is indispensable; an unmarried man cannot attain to wealth and power89.Among the Ama-Xosa and Ovaherero the chief object of warfare is cattle-stealing. Fugitives from other tribes are never delivered up by the Ama-Xosa, whatever the reason of their flight; for they strengthen the chief’s power. Another fact, showing the great importance they attach to the numerical strength of their tribe, is this, that he who kills a man or womanbyaccident has to pay a fine to the chief, as a compensation for the loss sufferedbythe government of the tribe90.We have already seen that the Massai are “true warriors and raiders” and that the Mairs and Meenas spend their time in “marauding, plundering and murdering”91.We see that among these tribes everybody is desirous of having as many people about him as possible for the protection of his own property and the capturing of his neighbour’s. And a convenient means of procuring such people is the purchase of slaves.There is one more secondary cause here, which we have not met with before. It is sometimes stated that keeping slaves is a mereluxury. Now rich nomads, like all rich people, love luxury. Like the rich Kazak Kirghiz who told Levchine that the possession of over 8000 horses procured him a reputation among his countrymen, many rich nomads will win renown by possessing a large retinue of slaves. Thus for instance we know that among the Beni Amer slave labour is of little use; yet it is stated, that the Beni Amer are ambitious to possess many slaves92. And slaves are preferable, as objects of luxury, to free servants. For slaves, generally acquired from beyond the limits of the tribe, are much more apt to gratify the pride of the rich man by their submission, than poor freemen,[285]who are always conscious of theirmembershipof the tribe and unwilling to be trampled down. The latter fact is proved by several statements of ethnographers.If a rich Samoyede refuses to give his poor countryman a reindeer for food, the latter has the right to carry off one or more from the rich man’s herd; the law does not give the owner any hold upon him93.Among the Yakuts, according to Müller, the rich sustain their poor fellow-tribesmen; if the latter lose their reindeer, they are indemnified by the rich. Another writer tells us that the poor, when dying of hunger, refrain from slaughtering an animal, from fear of losing their independence94.Similarly among the Ostyaks “members of the same tribe, whether large or small, consider themselves as relations, even where the common ancestor is unknown, and where the evidence of consanguinity is wholly wanting. Nevertheless, the feeling of consanguinity, sometimes real, sometimes conventional, is the fundamental principle of the union. The rich, of which there are few, help the poor, who are many. There is not much that can change hands. The little, however, that is wanted by the needy is taken as a right rather than a favour”95.The Altaians are very sensitive about their liberty. “Every poor man who joins a rich family considers himself a member of it. He will perish of hunger, rather than comply with a demand of his rich neighbour made in a commanding tone”96.Licata tells us that hungry Danakil go to their chief and say: “I am hungry, give me something to eat”97.Among the Larbas free labourers “work for one more fortunate than themselves, but not for a superior; for notwithstanding the relation of employer and employed, equality prevails”98.It is easy to understand that slaves are preferred to such servants. Only in one case is this preference mentioned by an ethnographer. Munzinger states that the slaves bought by the rich Beduan for household work are generally more trusted[286]than ordinary servants, as they are riveted to their position99. But we may safely suppose that in other cases also this circumstance has furthered the growth of slavery.We have explained why pastoral tribes have no great use for slave labour. We have also mentioned some motives that may induce such tribes to keep slaves. But the fact has not yet been accounted for, that some pastoral tribes keep slaves and others do not. Whence this difference? It has been shown that slavery does not only exist among pastoral tribes that till the soil to a limited extent. Among all pastoral tribes subsistence is dependent on capital. Wealth, too, exists among all these tribes100; and we cannot see why slaves, as a luxury, would be wanted by one such tribe more than by another. As slaves are sometimes employed as warriors, we might be inclined to suppose that slavery exists among all warlike tribes, and among these only. But there are several pastoral tribes which, though very warlike, do not keep slaves: Kazak Kirghiz, Turkomans, Massai, and some pastoral nomads of South Africa.That the subjection of tribes as such in stead of individual slaves, of which we have spoken in the last paragraph, cannot account for all cases in which slavery does not exist, becomes evident, if we take into consideration that most of the pastoral tribes of North-East Africa, which keep other tribes in subjection, practise slavery, whereas in Central Asia and Siberia we find neither subjected tribes nor slaves.Therefore there must be other causes.In chapter II we have spoken ofexternal causes: it may be that slaves would be of great use, and yet cannot be kept, because the coercive power of the tribe is not strong enough. We have also seen that this coercive power is most strongly developed where men have fixed habitations, live in rather large groups and preserve food for the time of scarcity, and where there is a group of somewhat homogeneous tribes maintaining, constant relations with each other. Pastoral tribes are nomadic,[287]do not live together in very large groups, and do not want to preserve food, for they have their supply of food always at hand. Yet the fact that several pastoral tribes keep slaves proves that at least among these the coercive power is strong enough. We shall try to find a cause peculiar to these tribes, that enables them to keep slaves. Now it is remarkable that our positive cases are nearly all of them found in a few definite parts of the globe: North-East Africa, the Caucasus, and Arabia; whereas the pastoral nomads of Siberia, Central Asia, India, and South Africa, with one exception (the Ovaherero), do not keep slaves. And the parts where slavery exists are exactly those where the slave-trade has for a long time been carried on on a large scale. Accordingly, the slaves these tribes keep are often purchased from slave-traders and in several cases belong to inferior races.The slaves of the Aeneze Bedouins are Negroes101.The slaves kept by the Larbas are Negroes purchased from slave-trading caravans102.Although we find no description of slave-trade among the Circassians, slaves in the Caucasus are exported on a large scale103.Most slaves found among the Somal and Danakil are articles of transit trade: they are purchased from interior tribes and intended to be sold to Arabians. A Somali never becomes the slave of a Somali, and prisoners of war are not enslaved104.Many Beduan make it their business to steal slaves, whom they sell in Massowah105.The slaves kept by the Beni Amer are either captured from enemies or purchased abroad; a Beni Amer never loses his freedom. Slaves are not, however, often sold abroad106.On the other hand, the pastoral tribes of Central Asia and Siberia live in secluded parts, far from the centres of the slave-trade.The slave-trade greatly facilitates the keeping of slaves. Where slaves are brought by slave-dealers from remote parts, it is much easier to keep them than where they have to be[288]captured from enemies,i.e.from the neighbours; in the latter case the slaves are very likely to run away and return to their native country; but a purchased slave transported from a great distance cannot so easily return; if he succeeded in escaping, he would be instantly recaptured by one of the foreign tribes whose countries he would have to traverse. Moreover, some tribes may, by their intercourse with slave-traders, have become familiar with the idea of slavery, and so the slave-trade may have suggested to them the keeping of slaves for their own use.There is another circumstance, which may partially account for the existence of slavery among some of these tribes: the slaves are often Negroes. And Negroes have always and everywhere been enslaved; they seem to be more fit for slaves than most races of mankind. Galton, speaking of the Damaras, says: “These savages court slavery. You engage one of them as a servant, and you find that he considers himself your property, and that you are, in fact, become the owner of a slave. They have no independence about them, generally speaking, but follow a master as spaniels would. Their hero-worship is directed to people who have wit and strength enough to ill-use them. Revenge is a very transient passion in their character, it gives way to admiration of the oppressor. The Damaras seem to me to love nothing; the only strong feelings they possess, which are not utterly gross and sensual, are those of admiration and fear. They seem to be made for slavery, and naturally fall into its ways”107. And Hutter, describing the Bali tribes of Cameroon, remarks that the Negro wants to be ruled and patiently endures any amount of oppression108. Similar descriptions may undoubtedly be given of many other Negro tribes. Moreover several slave-keeping nomadic tribes are Semites and Hamites, and therefore look upon the Negroes as an inferior race. Now, where slaves are procured mainly for military purposes (and we have seen that this is often the case with pastoral tribes), an absorption of foreigners into the tribe would answer the purpose as well as, and perhaps better than, slavery. But where the foreigners belong to inferior races, the members of the tribe[289]are not likely to intermarry with them and look upon them as their equals; they remain slaves, though they are not of great use as such. We must also take into consideration that inferior races are not so much to be dreaded as superior peoples; the latter, if individuals belonging to them were kept as slaves, might retaliate upon the slave-owners. This may have been the reason why the Kazak Kirghiz who, in Levchine’s time, kidnapped many Russians, always sold them abroad: it would not have been safe to keep them as slaves. Accordingly, Pallas states that in his time they used to kidnap men on the Russian frontiers towards the time when they were going to remove with their herds, so that they could not be pursued109.In the second chapter of this Part we have remarked that the growth of slavery is furthered by the existence of a group of more or less similar tribes, the slave-trade being in such cases the means of spreading slavery over the group. We may say now that, whether such a group exists or not, the slave-trade facilitates the keeping of slaves. When the coercive power of a tribe is not strong enough for the keeping of prisoners as slaves, the slave-trade may enable such a tribe to keep slaves; for the keeping of purchased slaves, brought from a great distance, does not require so much coercive power.We see that the difference between the slave-keeping and the other pastoral tribes consists in external circumstances. Pastoral tribes have no strong motives for making slaves, for the use of slave labour is small. On the other hand, there are no causes absolutely preventing them from keeping slaves. These tribes are, so to speak, in a state of equilibrium; a small additional cause on either side turns the balance. One such additional cause is the slave-trade; another is the neighbourhood of inferior races. There may be other small additional causes, peculiar to single tribes. We shall not inquire whether there are, but content ourselves with the foregoing conclusions, of which the principal are these, that the taming of animals does not naturally lead to the taming of men, and that the relation between capital and labour among pastoral tribes renders the economic use of slavery very small.[290]Recapitulating, we may remark that our general theory, that there is no great use for slave labour where subsistence depends on capital, is fully verified by our investigation of economic life among pastoral tribes.Two secondary internal causes found in the second chapter have been also met with among pastoral tribes: slaves are sometimes employed in warfare, and sometimes for domestic labour to relieve the women of their task. Two new secondary factors have been found in this chapter: slaves are kept as a luxury; and sometimes the subjection of tribes as such, serving as a substitute for slavery, makes slavery proper superfluous.With regard to the external causes it has been shown that the coercive power of pastoral tribes is not very strong, as they are nomadic and live in rather small groups; but this want is sometimes compensated for by the slave-trade and the neighbourhood of inferior races. The two latter circumstances may therefore rank as new external causes, the slave-trade taking the place of the existence of a homogeneous group. On the Pacific Coast of N. America it is the trade between tribes of the same culture, among pastoral nomads it is the trade with Arabia, etc.; but in either case it is the slave-trade that furthers the growth of slavery.Recapitulation of the causes we have found up to the present.Furthering the growth of slavery.Hindering the growth of slavery.I. Internal causes.A.General.1º. Subsistence easily acquired and not dependent on capital.1º. Subsistence dependent on capital.2º. Subsistence not dependent on capital, but difficult to procure.[291]B.Secondary economic:1º. Preserving of food.1º. Female labour making slave labour superfluous.2º. Trade and industry.3º. A high position of women.2º. Subjection of tribes as such.C.Secondary non-economic:1º. Slaves wanted for military purposes.1º. Militarism making slavery impossible.2º. Slaves kept as a luxury.II. External causes:1º. Fixed habitations.2º. Living in large groups.3º. Preserving of food110.4º. The slave-trade.5º. The neighbourhood of inferior races.[292]

§ 2.Slavery among pastoral tribes.

Yet several pastoral tribes keep slaves; this has still to be[281]accounted for. We shall inquire first, whether thesecondary causeswe have found in the last paragraph are at work here.1º.Condition of women.On the Pacific Coast of North America the men sometimes procure slaves, in order to relieve the women of a part of their task. There are some details on record suggestive of the same state of things among some pastoral tribes. Among the Circassians, Bahima and Beduan (pastoral tribes), Waganda, pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu, Ossetes and Gallas (agricultural tribes depending largely on cattle for their subsistence), slaves are employed for household work. The same is the case with female slaves among the Larbas and Somal of the towns. Munzinger states that only few Beduan are rich enough to keep a female slave or a maid-servant; therefore in most families the preparing of food falls to the share of the wife, this being almost her only occupation77. Hence we may infer that among the Beduan, and probably among some other tribes, slaves are procured by the men for the benefit of the women.2º.Preserving of food.This does not seem to require much labour among pastoral tribes. On the Pacific Coast of North America the fish have to be prepared for winter use. But where men live upon the products of their cattle, food is not at one time much more abundant than at another.3º.Trade and industry.Household work, sometimes performed by slaves, does not seem to serve the purposes of trade, as on the Pacific Coast; there is not a single detail on record, that would lead us to suppose that it does. We even find particulars tending to prove the contrary. Among the Beni Amer, who have many slaves, the women are continually occupied in making mats, the proceeds of which labour are often sufficient to pay the tribute to the Turks78. Slaves do not seem to join in this occupation.Among the Larbas free women manufacture tissues, which are sold abroad79. Probably slaves are not capable of performing such fine work.Among the Yorubas and pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu[282]the slaves are occupied in trading. But these tribes are not nomadic; moreover, these slaves do not, like the slaves on the Pacific Coast, prepare the articles of commerce, but are themselves the traders, which is quite another thing.4º.Slaves wanted as warriors.Slaves sometimes serve to augment the military strength of the community. From the survey of the work done by slaves, given in the beginning of this chapter, it appears that they are often employed in warfare, viz. among the nomadic Somal and Danakil, Kafirs, pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu, Mandingoes and Yorubas; probably also among the Bogos, where they generally take to robbery. Circassian slaves cannot be compelled to go to war80. Hence it seems to follow that they may go if they like. Among the Beni Amer native-born slaves are avenged by their own relatives; so these slaves are armed, and probably fight together with their masters.The ensuing statement strikingly shows how highly slaves are valued as warriors among the nomadic Somal and Danakil. If a slave kills one enemy, he becomes free; if two or more, he is entitled to being adopted. Having killed ten enemies, he becomes a person of rank and enjoys many privileges81.In these cases slaves strengthen the military force of the tribe. But the tribe profits only indirectly by this reinforcement of the family. Most pastoral nomads live in comparatively small groups, rather independently; there is no strong central government82. And where quarrels between these small groups are frequent, the more numerous the family (in the wider sense, the Romanfamilia, including slaves), the better will the head of the family be able to maintain his position83. And pastoral nomads have always a great motive for fighting: they can enrich themselves by a successful raid. Among hunting, fishing, and agricultural tribes, if the conqueror does not want to keep the vanquished as slaves, war gives little profit84. But[283]in the raids pastoral nomads make on each other, the successful raider may acquire numerous herds,i.e.great wealth. Therefore it is of the utmost importance for a man to have as numerous afamiliaas possible.When speaking of the Larbas, we have seen that their mode of life isun peu toujours comme la guerre. Their describer states: “Theft is the most threatening evil the nomad has to deal with; he is therefore most severe in suppressing it, the punishment being invariably death.” He also speaks of free servants, members of the family, who live under the protection and at the expense of some rich head of a family; they are generally very numerous, and form a body of clients that strengthens their patron’s power85.Levchine, speaking of the Kazak Kirghiz, says: “Their feuds are caused by the unrestrained desire for plunder, that ruins and entirely demoralizes them; this plundering is calledbaranta, Thesebarantasconsist in reciprocal cattle-stealing, from which often sanguinary combats result.… And we must not think that public hatred or contempt falls on those who are addicted to these horrible excesses; on the contrary, they enjoy a reputation for bravery, and are distinguished by the name ofBatyrorBoghatyr, which name spreads through all the hordes the fame of their exploits. Many of these braves, calledBatyrfor their plundering ardour, though many years dead, still live in the remembrance of their countrymen, and their names are celebrated.” Accordingly, one of the qualities required in a chief is a large family, that gives him the power to maintain his authority86.Among the Beni Amer, where it seems to be quite an ordinary thing for a noble to receive 100 cows as his portion of the spoils of war, it is a great support for a man to have many children, as in these countries family is opposed to family87.A writer of the 18thcentury tells us that “the Chukchi who live to the north of the river Anadir, are not subjected to the Russian empire, and often make raids on those brought under Russian control, on the Koryakes as well as on the Chukchi,[284]killing or making prisoners all they meet, and carrying off their herds of reindeer”88.Among the Somal and Gallas internal wars are very frequent; among the former most wars are marauding expeditions. And here too the possession of wife and children is indispensable; an unmarried man cannot attain to wealth and power89.Among the Ama-Xosa and Ovaherero the chief object of warfare is cattle-stealing. Fugitives from other tribes are never delivered up by the Ama-Xosa, whatever the reason of their flight; for they strengthen the chief’s power. Another fact, showing the great importance they attach to the numerical strength of their tribe, is this, that he who kills a man or womanbyaccident has to pay a fine to the chief, as a compensation for the loss sufferedbythe government of the tribe90.We have already seen that the Massai are “true warriors and raiders” and that the Mairs and Meenas spend their time in “marauding, plundering and murdering”91.We see that among these tribes everybody is desirous of having as many people about him as possible for the protection of his own property and the capturing of his neighbour’s. And a convenient means of procuring such people is the purchase of slaves.There is one more secondary cause here, which we have not met with before. It is sometimes stated that keeping slaves is a mereluxury. Now rich nomads, like all rich people, love luxury. Like the rich Kazak Kirghiz who told Levchine that the possession of over 8000 horses procured him a reputation among his countrymen, many rich nomads will win renown by possessing a large retinue of slaves. Thus for instance we know that among the Beni Amer slave labour is of little use; yet it is stated, that the Beni Amer are ambitious to possess many slaves92. And slaves are preferable, as objects of luxury, to free servants. For slaves, generally acquired from beyond the limits of the tribe, are much more apt to gratify the pride of the rich man by their submission, than poor freemen,[285]who are always conscious of theirmembershipof the tribe and unwilling to be trampled down. The latter fact is proved by several statements of ethnographers.If a rich Samoyede refuses to give his poor countryman a reindeer for food, the latter has the right to carry off one or more from the rich man’s herd; the law does not give the owner any hold upon him93.Among the Yakuts, according to Müller, the rich sustain their poor fellow-tribesmen; if the latter lose their reindeer, they are indemnified by the rich. Another writer tells us that the poor, when dying of hunger, refrain from slaughtering an animal, from fear of losing their independence94.Similarly among the Ostyaks “members of the same tribe, whether large or small, consider themselves as relations, even where the common ancestor is unknown, and where the evidence of consanguinity is wholly wanting. Nevertheless, the feeling of consanguinity, sometimes real, sometimes conventional, is the fundamental principle of the union. The rich, of which there are few, help the poor, who are many. There is not much that can change hands. The little, however, that is wanted by the needy is taken as a right rather than a favour”95.The Altaians are very sensitive about their liberty. “Every poor man who joins a rich family considers himself a member of it. He will perish of hunger, rather than comply with a demand of his rich neighbour made in a commanding tone”96.Licata tells us that hungry Danakil go to their chief and say: “I am hungry, give me something to eat”97.Among the Larbas free labourers “work for one more fortunate than themselves, but not for a superior; for notwithstanding the relation of employer and employed, equality prevails”98.It is easy to understand that slaves are preferred to such servants. Only in one case is this preference mentioned by an ethnographer. Munzinger states that the slaves bought by the rich Beduan for household work are generally more trusted[286]than ordinary servants, as they are riveted to their position99. But we may safely suppose that in other cases also this circumstance has furthered the growth of slavery.We have explained why pastoral tribes have no great use for slave labour. We have also mentioned some motives that may induce such tribes to keep slaves. But the fact has not yet been accounted for, that some pastoral tribes keep slaves and others do not. Whence this difference? It has been shown that slavery does not only exist among pastoral tribes that till the soil to a limited extent. Among all pastoral tribes subsistence is dependent on capital. Wealth, too, exists among all these tribes100; and we cannot see why slaves, as a luxury, would be wanted by one such tribe more than by another. As slaves are sometimes employed as warriors, we might be inclined to suppose that slavery exists among all warlike tribes, and among these only. But there are several pastoral tribes which, though very warlike, do not keep slaves: Kazak Kirghiz, Turkomans, Massai, and some pastoral nomads of South Africa.That the subjection of tribes as such in stead of individual slaves, of which we have spoken in the last paragraph, cannot account for all cases in which slavery does not exist, becomes evident, if we take into consideration that most of the pastoral tribes of North-East Africa, which keep other tribes in subjection, practise slavery, whereas in Central Asia and Siberia we find neither subjected tribes nor slaves.Therefore there must be other causes.In chapter II we have spoken ofexternal causes: it may be that slaves would be of great use, and yet cannot be kept, because the coercive power of the tribe is not strong enough. We have also seen that this coercive power is most strongly developed where men have fixed habitations, live in rather large groups and preserve food for the time of scarcity, and where there is a group of somewhat homogeneous tribes maintaining, constant relations with each other. Pastoral tribes are nomadic,[287]do not live together in very large groups, and do not want to preserve food, for they have their supply of food always at hand. Yet the fact that several pastoral tribes keep slaves proves that at least among these the coercive power is strong enough. We shall try to find a cause peculiar to these tribes, that enables them to keep slaves. Now it is remarkable that our positive cases are nearly all of them found in a few definite parts of the globe: North-East Africa, the Caucasus, and Arabia; whereas the pastoral nomads of Siberia, Central Asia, India, and South Africa, with one exception (the Ovaherero), do not keep slaves. And the parts where slavery exists are exactly those where the slave-trade has for a long time been carried on on a large scale. Accordingly, the slaves these tribes keep are often purchased from slave-traders and in several cases belong to inferior races.The slaves of the Aeneze Bedouins are Negroes101.The slaves kept by the Larbas are Negroes purchased from slave-trading caravans102.Although we find no description of slave-trade among the Circassians, slaves in the Caucasus are exported on a large scale103.Most slaves found among the Somal and Danakil are articles of transit trade: they are purchased from interior tribes and intended to be sold to Arabians. A Somali never becomes the slave of a Somali, and prisoners of war are not enslaved104.Many Beduan make it their business to steal slaves, whom they sell in Massowah105.The slaves kept by the Beni Amer are either captured from enemies or purchased abroad; a Beni Amer never loses his freedom. Slaves are not, however, often sold abroad106.On the other hand, the pastoral tribes of Central Asia and Siberia live in secluded parts, far from the centres of the slave-trade.The slave-trade greatly facilitates the keeping of slaves. Where slaves are brought by slave-dealers from remote parts, it is much easier to keep them than where they have to be[288]captured from enemies,i.e.from the neighbours; in the latter case the slaves are very likely to run away and return to their native country; but a purchased slave transported from a great distance cannot so easily return; if he succeeded in escaping, he would be instantly recaptured by one of the foreign tribes whose countries he would have to traverse. Moreover, some tribes may, by their intercourse with slave-traders, have become familiar with the idea of slavery, and so the slave-trade may have suggested to them the keeping of slaves for their own use.There is another circumstance, which may partially account for the existence of slavery among some of these tribes: the slaves are often Negroes. And Negroes have always and everywhere been enslaved; they seem to be more fit for slaves than most races of mankind. Galton, speaking of the Damaras, says: “These savages court slavery. You engage one of them as a servant, and you find that he considers himself your property, and that you are, in fact, become the owner of a slave. They have no independence about them, generally speaking, but follow a master as spaniels would. Their hero-worship is directed to people who have wit and strength enough to ill-use them. Revenge is a very transient passion in their character, it gives way to admiration of the oppressor. The Damaras seem to me to love nothing; the only strong feelings they possess, which are not utterly gross and sensual, are those of admiration and fear. They seem to be made for slavery, and naturally fall into its ways”107. And Hutter, describing the Bali tribes of Cameroon, remarks that the Negro wants to be ruled and patiently endures any amount of oppression108. Similar descriptions may undoubtedly be given of many other Negro tribes. Moreover several slave-keeping nomadic tribes are Semites and Hamites, and therefore look upon the Negroes as an inferior race. Now, where slaves are procured mainly for military purposes (and we have seen that this is often the case with pastoral tribes), an absorption of foreigners into the tribe would answer the purpose as well as, and perhaps better than, slavery. But where the foreigners belong to inferior races, the members of the tribe[289]are not likely to intermarry with them and look upon them as their equals; they remain slaves, though they are not of great use as such. We must also take into consideration that inferior races are not so much to be dreaded as superior peoples; the latter, if individuals belonging to them were kept as slaves, might retaliate upon the slave-owners. This may have been the reason why the Kazak Kirghiz who, in Levchine’s time, kidnapped many Russians, always sold them abroad: it would not have been safe to keep them as slaves. Accordingly, Pallas states that in his time they used to kidnap men on the Russian frontiers towards the time when they were going to remove with their herds, so that they could not be pursued109.In the second chapter of this Part we have remarked that the growth of slavery is furthered by the existence of a group of more or less similar tribes, the slave-trade being in such cases the means of spreading slavery over the group. We may say now that, whether such a group exists or not, the slave-trade facilitates the keeping of slaves. When the coercive power of a tribe is not strong enough for the keeping of prisoners as slaves, the slave-trade may enable such a tribe to keep slaves; for the keeping of purchased slaves, brought from a great distance, does not require so much coercive power.We see that the difference between the slave-keeping and the other pastoral tribes consists in external circumstances. Pastoral tribes have no strong motives for making slaves, for the use of slave labour is small. On the other hand, there are no causes absolutely preventing them from keeping slaves. These tribes are, so to speak, in a state of equilibrium; a small additional cause on either side turns the balance. One such additional cause is the slave-trade; another is the neighbourhood of inferior races. There may be other small additional causes, peculiar to single tribes. We shall not inquire whether there are, but content ourselves with the foregoing conclusions, of which the principal are these, that the taming of animals does not naturally lead to the taming of men, and that the relation between capital and labour among pastoral tribes renders the economic use of slavery very small.[290]Recapitulating, we may remark that our general theory, that there is no great use for slave labour where subsistence depends on capital, is fully verified by our investigation of economic life among pastoral tribes.Two secondary internal causes found in the second chapter have been also met with among pastoral tribes: slaves are sometimes employed in warfare, and sometimes for domestic labour to relieve the women of their task. Two new secondary factors have been found in this chapter: slaves are kept as a luxury; and sometimes the subjection of tribes as such, serving as a substitute for slavery, makes slavery proper superfluous.With regard to the external causes it has been shown that the coercive power of pastoral tribes is not very strong, as they are nomadic and live in rather small groups; but this want is sometimes compensated for by the slave-trade and the neighbourhood of inferior races. The two latter circumstances may therefore rank as new external causes, the slave-trade taking the place of the existence of a homogeneous group. On the Pacific Coast of N. America it is the trade between tribes of the same culture, among pastoral nomads it is the trade with Arabia, etc.; but in either case it is the slave-trade that furthers the growth of slavery.Recapitulation of the causes we have found up to the present.Furthering the growth of slavery.Hindering the growth of slavery.I. Internal causes.A.General.1º. Subsistence easily acquired and not dependent on capital.1º. Subsistence dependent on capital.2º. Subsistence not dependent on capital, but difficult to procure.[291]B.Secondary economic:1º. Preserving of food.1º. Female labour making slave labour superfluous.2º. Trade and industry.3º. A high position of women.2º. Subjection of tribes as such.C.Secondary non-economic:1º. Slaves wanted for military purposes.1º. Militarism making slavery impossible.2º. Slaves kept as a luxury.II. External causes:1º. Fixed habitations.2º. Living in large groups.3º. Preserving of food110.4º. The slave-trade.5º. The neighbourhood of inferior races.[292]

Yet several pastoral tribes keep slaves; this has still to be[281]accounted for. We shall inquire first, whether thesecondary causeswe have found in the last paragraph are at work here.

1º.Condition of women.On the Pacific Coast of North America the men sometimes procure slaves, in order to relieve the women of a part of their task. There are some details on record suggestive of the same state of things among some pastoral tribes. Among the Circassians, Bahima and Beduan (pastoral tribes), Waganda, pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu, Ossetes and Gallas (agricultural tribes depending largely on cattle for their subsistence), slaves are employed for household work. The same is the case with female slaves among the Larbas and Somal of the towns. Munzinger states that only few Beduan are rich enough to keep a female slave or a maid-servant; therefore in most families the preparing of food falls to the share of the wife, this being almost her only occupation77. Hence we may infer that among the Beduan, and probably among some other tribes, slaves are procured by the men for the benefit of the women.

2º.Preserving of food.This does not seem to require much labour among pastoral tribes. On the Pacific Coast of North America the fish have to be prepared for winter use. But where men live upon the products of their cattle, food is not at one time much more abundant than at another.

3º.Trade and industry.Household work, sometimes performed by slaves, does not seem to serve the purposes of trade, as on the Pacific Coast; there is not a single detail on record, that would lead us to suppose that it does. We even find particulars tending to prove the contrary. Among the Beni Amer, who have many slaves, the women are continually occupied in making mats, the proceeds of which labour are often sufficient to pay the tribute to the Turks78. Slaves do not seem to join in this occupation.

Among the Larbas free women manufacture tissues, which are sold abroad79. Probably slaves are not capable of performing such fine work.

Among the Yorubas and pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu[282]the slaves are occupied in trading. But these tribes are not nomadic; moreover, these slaves do not, like the slaves on the Pacific Coast, prepare the articles of commerce, but are themselves the traders, which is quite another thing.

4º.Slaves wanted as warriors.Slaves sometimes serve to augment the military strength of the community. From the survey of the work done by slaves, given in the beginning of this chapter, it appears that they are often employed in warfare, viz. among the nomadic Somal and Danakil, Kafirs, pirate-tribes of Mindanao and Sulu, Mandingoes and Yorubas; probably also among the Bogos, where they generally take to robbery. Circassian slaves cannot be compelled to go to war80. Hence it seems to follow that they may go if they like. Among the Beni Amer native-born slaves are avenged by their own relatives; so these slaves are armed, and probably fight together with their masters.

The ensuing statement strikingly shows how highly slaves are valued as warriors among the nomadic Somal and Danakil. If a slave kills one enemy, he becomes free; if two or more, he is entitled to being adopted. Having killed ten enemies, he becomes a person of rank and enjoys many privileges81.

In these cases slaves strengthen the military force of the tribe. But the tribe profits only indirectly by this reinforcement of the family. Most pastoral nomads live in comparatively small groups, rather independently; there is no strong central government82. And where quarrels between these small groups are frequent, the more numerous the family (in the wider sense, the Romanfamilia, including slaves), the better will the head of the family be able to maintain his position83. And pastoral nomads have always a great motive for fighting: they can enrich themselves by a successful raid. Among hunting, fishing, and agricultural tribes, if the conqueror does not want to keep the vanquished as slaves, war gives little profit84. But[283]in the raids pastoral nomads make on each other, the successful raider may acquire numerous herds,i.e.great wealth. Therefore it is of the utmost importance for a man to have as numerous afamiliaas possible.

When speaking of the Larbas, we have seen that their mode of life isun peu toujours comme la guerre. Their describer states: “Theft is the most threatening evil the nomad has to deal with; he is therefore most severe in suppressing it, the punishment being invariably death.” He also speaks of free servants, members of the family, who live under the protection and at the expense of some rich head of a family; they are generally very numerous, and form a body of clients that strengthens their patron’s power85.

Levchine, speaking of the Kazak Kirghiz, says: “Their feuds are caused by the unrestrained desire for plunder, that ruins and entirely demoralizes them; this plundering is calledbaranta, Thesebarantasconsist in reciprocal cattle-stealing, from which often sanguinary combats result.… And we must not think that public hatred or contempt falls on those who are addicted to these horrible excesses; on the contrary, they enjoy a reputation for bravery, and are distinguished by the name ofBatyrorBoghatyr, which name spreads through all the hordes the fame of their exploits. Many of these braves, calledBatyrfor their plundering ardour, though many years dead, still live in the remembrance of their countrymen, and their names are celebrated.” Accordingly, one of the qualities required in a chief is a large family, that gives him the power to maintain his authority86.

Among the Beni Amer, where it seems to be quite an ordinary thing for a noble to receive 100 cows as his portion of the spoils of war, it is a great support for a man to have many children, as in these countries family is opposed to family87.

A writer of the 18thcentury tells us that “the Chukchi who live to the north of the river Anadir, are not subjected to the Russian empire, and often make raids on those brought under Russian control, on the Koryakes as well as on the Chukchi,[284]killing or making prisoners all they meet, and carrying off their herds of reindeer”88.

Among the Somal and Gallas internal wars are very frequent; among the former most wars are marauding expeditions. And here too the possession of wife and children is indispensable; an unmarried man cannot attain to wealth and power89.

Among the Ama-Xosa and Ovaherero the chief object of warfare is cattle-stealing. Fugitives from other tribes are never delivered up by the Ama-Xosa, whatever the reason of their flight; for they strengthen the chief’s power. Another fact, showing the great importance they attach to the numerical strength of their tribe, is this, that he who kills a man or womanbyaccident has to pay a fine to the chief, as a compensation for the loss sufferedbythe government of the tribe90.

We have already seen that the Massai are “true warriors and raiders” and that the Mairs and Meenas spend their time in “marauding, plundering and murdering”91.

We see that among these tribes everybody is desirous of having as many people about him as possible for the protection of his own property and the capturing of his neighbour’s. And a convenient means of procuring such people is the purchase of slaves.

There is one more secondary cause here, which we have not met with before. It is sometimes stated that keeping slaves is a mereluxury. Now rich nomads, like all rich people, love luxury. Like the rich Kazak Kirghiz who told Levchine that the possession of over 8000 horses procured him a reputation among his countrymen, many rich nomads will win renown by possessing a large retinue of slaves. Thus for instance we know that among the Beni Amer slave labour is of little use; yet it is stated, that the Beni Amer are ambitious to possess many slaves92. And slaves are preferable, as objects of luxury, to free servants. For slaves, generally acquired from beyond the limits of the tribe, are much more apt to gratify the pride of the rich man by their submission, than poor freemen,[285]who are always conscious of theirmembershipof the tribe and unwilling to be trampled down. The latter fact is proved by several statements of ethnographers.

If a rich Samoyede refuses to give his poor countryman a reindeer for food, the latter has the right to carry off one or more from the rich man’s herd; the law does not give the owner any hold upon him93.

Among the Yakuts, according to Müller, the rich sustain their poor fellow-tribesmen; if the latter lose their reindeer, they are indemnified by the rich. Another writer tells us that the poor, when dying of hunger, refrain from slaughtering an animal, from fear of losing their independence94.

Similarly among the Ostyaks “members of the same tribe, whether large or small, consider themselves as relations, even where the common ancestor is unknown, and where the evidence of consanguinity is wholly wanting. Nevertheless, the feeling of consanguinity, sometimes real, sometimes conventional, is the fundamental principle of the union. The rich, of which there are few, help the poor, who are many. There is not much that can change hands. The little, however, that is wanted by the needy is taken as a right rather than a favour”95.

The Altaians are very sensitive about their liberty. “Every poor man who joins a rich family considers himself a member of it. He will perish of hunger, rather than comply with a demand of his rich neighbour made in a commanding tone”96.

Licata tells us that hungry Danakil go to their chief and say: “I am hungry, give me something to eat”97.

Among the Larbas free labourers “work for one more fortunate than themselves, but not for a superior; for notwithstanding the relation of employer and employed, equality prevails”98.

It is easy to understand that slaves are preferred to such servants. Only in one case is this preference mentioned by an ethnographer. Munzinger states that the slaves bought by the rich Beduan for household work are generally more trusted[286]than ordinary servants, as they are riveted to their position99. But we may safely suppose that in other cases also this circumstance has furthered the growth of slavery.

We have explained why pastoral tribes have no great use for slave labour. We have also mentioned some motives that may induce such tribes to keep slaves. But the fact has not yet been accounted for, that some pastoral tribes keep slaves and others do not. Whence this difference? It has been shown that slavery does not only exist among pastoral tribes that till the soil to a limited extent. Among all pastoral tribes subsistence is dependent on capital. Wealth, too, exists among all these tribes100; and we cannot see why slaves, as a luxury, would be wanted by one such tribe more than by another. As slaves are sometimes employed as warriors, we might be inclined to suppose that slavery exists among all warlike tribes, and among these only. But there are several pastoral tribes which, though very warlike, do not keep slaves: Kazak Kirghiz, Turkomans, Massai, and some pastoral nomads of South Africa.

That the subjection of tribes as such in stead of individual slaves, of which we have spoken in the last paragraph, cannot account for all cases in which slavery does not exist, becomes evident, if we take into consideration that most of the pastoral tribes of North-East Africa, which keep other tribes in subjection, practise slavery, whereas in Central Asia and Siberia we find neither subjected tribes nor slaves.

Therefore there must be other causes.

In chapter II we have spoken ofexternal causes: it may be that slaves would be of great use, and yet cannot be kept, because the coercive power of the tribe is not strong enough. We have also seen that this coercive power is most strongly developed where men have fixed habitations, live in rather large groups and preserve food for the time of scarcity, and where there is a group of somewhat homogeneous tribes maintaining, constant relations with each other. Pastoral tribes are nomadic,[287]do not live together in very large groups, and do not want to preserve food, for they have their supply of food always at hand. Yet the fact that several pastoral tribes keep slaves proves that at least among these the coercive power is strong enough. We shall try to find a cause peculiar to these tribes, that enables them to keep slaves. Now it is remarkable that our positive cases are nearly all of them found in a few definite parts of the globe: North-East Africa, the Caucasus, and Arabia; whereas the pastoral nomads of Siberia, Central Asia, India, and South Africa, with one exception (the Ovaherero), do not keep slaves. And the parts where slavery exists are exactly those where the slave-trade has for a long time been carried on on a large scale. Accordingly, the slaves these tribes keep are often purchased from slave-traders and in several cases belong to inferior races.

The slaves of the Aeneze Bedouins are Negroes101.

The slaves kept by the Larbas are Negroes purchased from slave-trading caravans102.

Although we find no description of slave-trade among the Circassians, slaves in the Caucasus are exported on a large scale103.

Most slaves found among the Somal and Danakil are articles of transit trade: they are purchased from interior tribes and intended to be sold to Arabians. A Somali never becomes the slave of a Somali, and prisoners of war are not enslaved104.

Many Beduan make it their business to steal slaves, whom they sell in Massowah105.

The slaves kept by the Beni Amer are either captured from enemies or purchased abroad; a Beni Amer never loses his freedom. Slaves are not, however, often sold abroad106.

On the other hand, the pastoral tribes of Central Asia and Siberia live in secluded parts, far from the centres of the slave-trade.

The slave-trade greatly facilitates the keeping of slaves. Where slaves are brought by slave-dealers from remote parts, it is much easier to keep them than where they have to be[288]captured from enemies,i.e.from the neighbours; in the latter case the slaves are very likely to run away and return to their native country; but a purchased slave transported from a great distance cannot so easily return; if he succeeded in escaping, he would be instantly recaptured by one of the foreign tribes whose countries he would have to traverse. Moreover, some tribes may, by their intercourse with slave-traders, have become familiar with the idea of slavery, and so the slave-trade may have suggested to them the keeping of slaves for their own use.

There is another circumstance, which may partially account for the existence of slavery among some of these tribes: the slaves are often Negroes. And Negroes have always and everywhere been enslaved; they seem to be more fit for slaves than most races of mankind. Galton, speaking of the Damaras, says: “These savages court slavery. You engage one of them as a servant, and you find that he considers himself your property, and that you are, in fact, become the owner of a slave. They have no independence about them, generally speaking, but follow a master as spaniels would. Their hero-worship is directed to people who have wit and strength enough to ill-use them. Revenge is a very transient passion in their character, it gives way to admiration of the oppressor. The Damaras seem to me to love nothing; the only strong feelings they possess, which are not utterly gross and sensual, are those of admiration and fear. They seem to be made for slavery, and naturally fall into its ways”107. And Hutter, describing the Bali tribes of Cameroon, remarks that the Negro wants to be ruled and patiently endures any amount of oppression108. Similar descriptions may undoubtedly be given of many other Negro tribes. Moreover several slave-keeping nomadic tribes are Semites and Hamites, and therefore look upon the Negroes as an inferior race. Now, where slaves are procured mainly for military purposes (and we have seen that this is often the case with pastoral tribes), an absorption of foreigners into the tribe would answer the purpose as well as, and perhaps better than, slavery. But where the foreigners belong to inferior races, the members of the tribe[289]are not likely to intermarry with them and look upon them as their equals; they remain slaves, though they are not of great use as such. We must also take into consideration that inferior races are not so much to be dreaded as superior peoples; the latter, if individuals belonging to them were kept as slaves, might retaliate upon the slave-owners. This may have been the reason why the Kazak Kirghiz who, in Levchine’s time, kidnapped many Russians, always sold them abroad: it would not have been safe to keep them as slaves. Accordingly, Pallas states that in his time they used to kidnap men on the Russian frontiers towards the time when they were going to remove with their herds, so that they could not be pursued109.

In the second chapter of this Part we have remarked that the growth of slavery is furthered by the existence of a group of more or less similar tribes, the slave-trade being in such cases the means of spreading slavery over the group. We may say now that, whether such a group exists or not, the slave-trade facilitates the keeping of slaves. When the coercive power of a tribe is not strong enough for the keeping of prisoners as slaves, the slave-trade may enable such a tribe to keep slaves; for the keeping of purchased slaves, brought from a great distance, does not require so much coercive power.

We see that the difference between the slave-keeping and the other pastoral tribes consists in external circumstances. Pastoral tribes have no strong motives for making slaves, for the use of slave labour is small. On the other hand, there are no causes absolutely preventing them from keeping slaves. These tribes are, so to speak, in a state of equilibrium; a small additional cause on either side turns the balance. One such additional cause is the slave-trade; another is the neighbourhood of inferior races. There may be other small additional causes, peculiar to single tribes. We shall not inquire whether there are, but content ourselves with the foregoing conclusions, of which the principal are these, that the taming of animals does not naturally lead to the taming of men, and that the relation between capital and labour among pastoral tribes renders the economic use of slavery very small.[290]

Recapitulating, we may remark that our general theory, that there is no great use for slave labour where subsistence depends on capital, is fully verified by our investigation of economic life among pastoral tribes.

Two secondary internal causes found in the second chapter have been also met with among pastoral tribes: slaves are sometimes employed in warfare, and sometimes for domestic labour to relieve the women of their task. Two new secondary factors have been found in this chapter: slaves are kept as a luxury; and sometimes the subjection of tribes as such, serving as a substitute for slavery, makes slavery proper superfluous.

With regard to the external causes it has been shown that the coercive power of pastoral tribes is not very strong, as they are nomadic and live in rather small groups; but this want is sometimes compensated for by the slave-trade and the neighbourhood of inferior races. The two latter circumstances may therefore rank as new external causes, the slave-trade taking the place of the existence of a homogeneous group. On the Pacific Coast of N. America it is the trade between tribes of the same culture, among pastoral nomads it is the trade with Arabia, etc.; but in either case it is the slave-trade that furthers the growth of slavery.

Recapitulation of the causes we have found up to the present.Furthering the growth of slavery.Hindering the growth of slavery.I. Internal causes.A.General.1º. Subsistence easily acquired and not dependent on capital.1º. Subsistence dependent on capital.2º. Subsistence not dependent on capital, but difficult to procure.[291]B.Secondary economic:1º. Preserving of food.1º. Female labour making slave labour superfluous.2º. Trade and industry.3º. A high position of women.2º. Subjection of tribes as such.C.Secondary non-economic:1º. Slaves wanted for military purposes.1º. Militarism making slavery impossible.2º. Slaves kept as a luxury.II. External causes:1º. Fixed habitations.2º. Living in large groups.3º. Preserving of food110.4º. The slave-trade.5º. The neighbourhood of inferior races.

[292]

Back to IndexNext