Chiefs, Sub-Chiefs and Notables and Their Emone
At the head of each clan is the amidi, or chief of the clan. He is, and is recognised as being, the only true chief.
He is the most important personage of his clan, and is treated with the respect due to his office; but, though he takes a leading part in all matters affecting the clan, he is not a person with any administrative or judicial functions, and he has no power of punishment or control over the members of the clan. In public ceremonial matters of importance, however, he has functions which rest primarily upon him alone, and he does, in fact, always perform these functions in his own village; and on the occasion of a big feast (as to which see below), he does so in whatever village of the clan that feast may be held.
The chief lives in one of the villages of the clan, but may have houses in other villages of that clan also. In the village in which he mainly resides is his emone or club-house, which is the only true emone of the clan; and for the upkeep and repair of this he is responsible. This is the ceremonial emone in his own village, and is always the one used in connection with the ceremony of a big feast in any village of the clan; and, if the feast be held in a village other than that in which is his then existing emone, another one is built in that village in lieu of his former one in the other village.
There is not in connection with these chiefs and their ceremonies any distinctive difference in importance between the right and the left as regards the positions occupied by them on the emone platform or the structure of the emone, such as is found among the Roro people.
Next in rank to the chief, and at the head of each village of the clan, there is a sub-chief, or em’ u babe, this term meaning “father of the village.” He is not regarded as a true chief, but he is entitled, and it is his duty, to perform in his own village all the functions of the chief, except those connected with the big feast. He and the similar sub-chiefs of the other villages of the clan are the persons who take the prominent part in supporting the chief in any ceremonial function concerning the whole clan in which the latter may be engaged, and in particular at the big feast. The em’ u babe is usually a relative of the chief, and at all events is an important personage. He also has in his own village his emone, which is the principal emone of that village, and is used for all ceremonial functions in that village except the big feast, but it is not regarded as being a true emone. The chief holds in his own village of residence both his office of amidi and that of em’ u babe, there being no other person holding the latter office in that village.
Next in rank to the sub-chiefs come a number of ake baibe, which means “great men.” These are the leading people—the aristocracy—of the clan. There are no distinctive social grades of rank among them. Their number is often very large in proportion to the total number of male inhabitants of a village; indeed sometimes almost every member of a village will claim to belong to this class. These people are in no sense office-bearers, and have no special duties to perform, though on a ceremonial occasion they are entitled to have their importance borne in mind. Each of them also is entitled to have an emone (here again not a true emone) in his village, but in fact their numbers often make this practically impossible, and you rarely see more than two or three emone in one village.
The above are all the chiefs and notables of the clan. There is no such thing as a war chief.
Aristocracy in its various forms is not a condition to which a man attains on getting older—it is attained by inheritance.
The office of the chief is hereditary in the male line by strict rules of descent and primogeniture. On the death of a chief his office descends to his eldest son, or if that son has died leaving children, it descends to the eldest son of that son, and so on for subsequent generations. Failing the eldest son or male issue in the male line of the eldest son, the office devolves upon the late chiefs second son or his male issue in the male line. And so on for other sons and their issue. Failing such male issue the office passes to a collateral relation of the late chief on his father’s side (e.g., the late chief’s next eldest brother or that brother’s son, or the late chief’s second brother or that brother’s son), the ascertainment of the devolution being based upon a general principle of nearest male relationship in the male line and primogeniture.[3]
The chief holds his office for life, but he may in his lifetime resign it in favour of the person entitled to succeed him, and this in fact often occurs. He cannot, however, on the appointment of his successor still continue in office himself, so as to create a joint chieftainship, as is done in Mekeo. He, as chief, is subject to no special taboo, and there is no qualification for office, other, of course, than hereditary right; but no chief can perform the functions of his office, or build for himself an emone, until he has married. There is no ceremony on the chiefs accession to office on the death of his predecessor; but there is a ceremony (to be described hereafter) on a chief’s abdication in favour of his successor. Cases have, I was told, occurred in which a man has in one way or another forced himself into the position of chief, though not qualified by descent, and has thus become a chief, from whom subsequent chieftainship descent has been traced, but I could learn nothing of the circumstances under which this had occurred. Also it has happened that, when a chief has been weak, and has not asserted his position, a sub-chief has more or less usurped his power and influence, without actually upsetting his chieftainship or supplanting him in his performance of ceremonial duties.
If the chief on acquiring office by inheritance is a child, or not qualified to act (e.g., unmarried), he is nevertheless chief; but some person will usually act as his guardian, and perform his functions for him until he has qualified. This person will probably be one of the young chief’s eldest male paternal relations (e.g., the eldest living brother of the last previous chief), and will presumably be a person of consequence; but he will not necessarily be one of the sub-chiefs.
All the above observations concerning the hereditary nature of a chief’s office and subsequently explained matters apply also to the case of a sub-chief, except that there is no ceremony on his resigning office in favour of his successor, and that the usurpation of the office of a sub-chief, of the occurrence of which I found no record, would perhaps be more difficult of accomplishment. In the event of a village throwing off an offshoot village, or itself splitting up into two villages, the then existing sub-chief of the original village would continue his office in it or, in case of a division, in one of the villages resulting from the split, and the other village would have for its sub-chief some one of the ake-baibe of the original village, probably the one who was most active in organising the split. On the other hand, if several villages united into one, one only of their sub-chiefs could be sub-chief of the village arising from the amalgamation, and the others would sink to the rank of ake-baibe.
The observations concerning the hereditary nature of a chiefs rank also apply to the ake-baibe. I have no information concerning them on the other points; but these are not so important as regards these people, who have no official position and have no duties to perform.
There are, as will be seen hereafter, a number of persons who are employed from time to time to perform various acts and functions of a ceremonious or superstitious character, notably the man who has the important duty of killing pigs at feasts; but these men are not by virtue of their offices or functions either chiefs or sub-chiefs, or even notables or important personages. It is in each case a matter of the specific personal power which the man is believed to possess. Any of them might happen to be an important personage, and the pig-killer, whose office is a prominent one, would probably be one; though in his case muscular strength would, I understand, be an important element of qualification.[4]
[1] This is subject to the qualification which arises from the fact (stated below) that a member of one clan who migrates to a village of another clan retains his imbele relationship to the members of his own old clan, although he has by his change of residence obtained a similar relationship to the members of the clan in whose village he has settled.
[2] See Annual Report for June, 1910, which on p. 5 speaks of “several villages round about the Mission, known as Sivu.”
[3] Compare the Koita system, under which under certain conditions the son of a chief’s sister might succeed him (Seligmann, Melanesians of British New Guinea, p. 52). Such a thing could not take place among the Mafulu.
[4] I do not know how far this pig-killer may be compared with the Roro ovia akiva, or chief of the knife, referred to by Dr. Seligmann (Melanesians of British New Guinea, p. 219). The Mafulu pig-killer cannot be regarded as being even a quasi-chief, and his office is not hereditary. It is noticeable also that he is the man who kills the pigs, whereas the ovia akiva only cuts up the bodies after the pigs have been killed by someone else.