[34] Taylor, Te Ika a Maui, p. 293. See also Johnston, Maoria, p. 43.
[35] Clemes, ‘Malagasy Proverbs,’ in Antananarivo Annual, iv. 29.
[36] Casalis, Basutos, p. 310.
[37] Burchell, Travels in the Interior of Southern Africa, ii. 557.
[38] Tristram, The Great Sahara, p. 207 sq.
But instead of being regarded as a duty, industrial activity is not infrequently looked down upon as disreputable for a free man. This is especially the case among warlike nations, nomadic tribes, and peoples who have many slaves. In Uganda, for instance, the prevalence of slavery “causes all manual labour to be looked upon as derogatory to the dignity of a free man.”[39] The Masai[40] and Matabele[41] consider that the only occupation which becomes a man is warfare. The Arabs of the desert hold labour humiliating to anybody but a slave.[42] Speaking of the Turkomans, Vámbéry observes that “in his domestic circle, the nomad presents us a picture of the most absolute indolence. In his eyes it is the greatest shame for a man to apply his hand to any domestic occupation.”[43] The Chippewas “have ever looked upon agricultural and mechanical labours as degrading,” and “have regarded the use of the bow and arrow, the war-club and spear, as the noblest employments of man.”[44] Among the Iroquois “the warrior despised the toil of husbandry, and held all labour beneath him.”[45] Though an industrious race, the Maoris considered it more honourable, as well as more desirable, to acquire property by war and plunder than by labour.[46] Among the Line Islanders it is undignified for a landholder to do work of any kind, except to make weapons, hence he employs persons of the lower class to work for him.[47] In Nukahiva the people of distinction “suffer the nails on the fingers to grow very long, that it may be evident they are not accustomed to hard labour.”[48] This contempt for industrial activity is easy to explain. A man who earns his livelihood by labour is considered to be lacking in those qualities which are alone admired—courage and strength;—or work is associated with the idea of servile subjection. It is also universally held degrading for a man to engage in any occupation which belongs to the women.[49] Thus among hunting and pastoral peoples it would be quite out of place for him to supply the household with vegetable food.[50] On the other hand, when agriculture became an indispensable means to maintenance of life it at the same time became respectable. But trade was scorned, probably, as Mr. Spencer suggests, because it was carried on chiefly by unsettled persons, who were detached, untrustworthy members of a community in which most men had fixed positions.[51] The Kandhs “consider it beneath their dignity to barter or traffic, and …. regard as base and plebeian all who are not either warriors or tillers of the soil.”[52] The Javans “have a contempt for trade, and those of higher rank esteem it disgraceful to be engaged in it; but the common people are ever ready to engage in the labours of agriculture, and the chiefs to honour and encourage agricultural industry.”[53]
[39] Wilson and Felkin, op. cit. i. 186.
[40] Merker, Die Masai, p. 117.
[41] Holub, ‘Die Ma-Atabele,’ in Zeitschr. f. Ethnol. xxv. 198.
[42] Burton, Pilgrimage to Al-Madinah & Meccah, ii. 10.