The slave-trade is of more interest to us here. It has been, shown that among the tribes of the Pacific Coast of North America a brisk trade in slaves was carried on, which must have greatly accelerated the growth of slavery; for it made the keeping of slaves much easier than it would have been if each of these tribes had had to procure its slaves by capture in war. It has also been remarked that among pastoral tribes slavery exists almost exclusively in those parts, where a trade in slaves with civilized or semi-civilized peoples is or was carried on, viz. in Arabia, the Caucasus, North-east and North-west Africa; whereas the pastoral tribes that live in outlying regions (Siberia, South Africa) with the only exception of the Ovaherero, do not keep slaves. We shall inquire now whether the same is the case with agricultural tribes, whether among them too slavery is of rare occurrence in those parts where the slave-trade has never been carried on.
In North America, at the time of its discovery, slavery did not exist among any agricultural tribe. Negro slavery, practised by a few of them in later times, was derived from the whites.
In South America we have found only a few slave-keeping agricultural tribes; and the slave-trade formerly carried on by the whites may go far to explain the existence of slavery in these few cases. “The Brazilian native” says Martius “sometimes sells his children to people of white races, much oftener than to those of his own colour.” The principal object of warfare among the natives, in Martius’ time, was to capture slaves, whom they sold either to other tribes or to colonists of Portuguese extraction. The custom of selling prisoners to white colonists has strongly influenced the native character. It was already practised very shortly after the discovery of America. Many Indians were transported to Spain and Portugal. The Mamelucos, living in San Paolo, made long and sanguinary wars upon the Indians. They are said during 130 years to have killed [[409]]and enslaved more than two millions of Indians. Pedro de Avila, governor of Buenos Ayres, complained that the Paulistas carried on this trade in public and from 1628 to 1630 had brought 60,000 Indians to the market at Rio Janeiro. The whites continually availed themselves of the quarrels of the several Indian tribes, to procure such Indians as had been made prisoners. Even in Martius’ time this trade went on, especially in thinly peopled, outlying districts, where the Brazilian government could not prevent it. The wars of the Indians were simply marauding expeditions; their object was to procure prisoners for sale to Brazilian whites[320].
In Oceania, slavery was an aboriginal institution in New Zealand and part of the Solomon group and the Bismarck Archipelago. From the lack of details concerning a system of slave labour, we must conclude that in these islands the economic use of slaves was small. Slavery further existed in the western part of New Guinea, where it probably still exists. Here foreign influence clearly appears. In the eastern part of the island, that till quite recently had not been visited by foreigners (British and German New Guinea), slavery is unknown; and the western part (Dutch New Guinea), where slavery exists, was for a long time under the rule of the sultan of Tidore[321]. The tribute which the inhabitants of New Guinea had to pay to the sultan consisted partly of slaves; moreover, many Papuans were captured as slaves in the hongi raids[322]. This, however, is not sufficient to account for the keeping of slaves by Papuans themselves. But we may consider, first that several districts on the coast are inhabited by a mongrel race of Papuans and Malays (e.g. on the Gulf of Macluer), and secondly that the trade with Tidore, Serang, and other Malay countries must have thoroughly changed the natives’ mode of life. Thus we are told that the Dorey people have become somewhat civilized by their intercourse with traders from the Moluccas[323]. We may notice here that all districts where slavery is carried on lie on the coast, and are therefore easiest of access to foreigners. And those districts of Dutch New Guinea of which it is stated [[410]]that there are no slaves, Humboldt Bay and Hattam, have never been visited by hongi fleets[324]. Accordingly, Ottow and Geissler remark that the mountain tribes do not keep slaves, but kill all their prisoners, for fear they might escape. The coast tribes, however, being able to procure slaves from a great distance, who are less likely to escape, practise slavery[325].
In the Malay Archipelago Mohammedanism already prevailed to a great extent before the conquista, and had even advanced as far as the Philippines[326]. Wherever slavery exists in the Archipelago, we are not certain that we have to deal with a phenomenon of unadulterated savage life. The influence of semi-civilized Mohammedans spreads over nearly the whole of the Archipelago.
In India the slave-trade with semi-civilized countries is, or was, also carried on by the natives. Cooper states that the Meshmees sell slaves to Tibet[327]. According to Colquhoun the Karen-nee sell many slaves to the Shans of Zimmé and these again to the Siamese[328]. And Rousselet tells us that among the Kafirs “slavery exists within certain limits, but this criminal commerce would cease altogether if there were not such a ready sale for slaves at Djalalabad, Kounar, Asmar and Tchitral”[329].
From the Caucasus, as we have already seen, slaves are exported to Turkey on a large scale[330].
Africa is the classical country of the slave-trade. Egypt and Ethiopia furnished a certain number of slaves to ancient Greece, and at Rome there was a regular importation of slaves, some of whom were brought from Africa[331]. Herodotus speaks of slaves sent to ancient Egypt as tribute from Ethiopia[332]. That in later times the African slave-trade, carried on by Arabs in East Africa and by Europeans in West Africa, assumed enormous proportions, need scarcely be said. In the later half of the 19th century the Mohammedan East still received a large supply of slaves from Africa. Ingram remarks: “The principal centres from which in recent times the supply has been furnished to Egypt, Morocco, Turkey, Arabia, and Persia, are three in number. 1. The Soudan, south of the Great Sahara, [[411]]appears to be one vast hunting-ground. Captives are brought thence to the slave-market of Kuka in Bornu.… Negroes are also brought to Morocco from the Western Soudan, and from Timbuktu.… 2. The basin of the Nile, extending to the great lakes, is another region infested by the slave trade.… 3. There has long been a slave-trade from the East African coast. The stream of supply came mainly from the southern Nyassa districts by three or four routes to Ibo, Mozambique, Angoche, and Kilimane. Madagascar and the Comoro Islands obtained most of their slaves from the Mozambique coast.… There are other minor branches of the trade elsewhere in Africa. Thus from Harar in Somâliland caravans are sent to Berberah on the coast, where there is a great annual fair. The slaves are collected from the inland Galla countries, from Gurâgwe, and from Abyssinia, the Abyssinians being the most highly esteemed”[333].
We see that in most parts of the world inhabited by slave-keeping agricultural savages, slaves are, or were, purchased or captured by civilized or semi-civilized peoples; whereas in those parts where the slave-trade has always been unknown, slavery has never prevailed to any considerable extent.
We shall try to account for this fact. But we must first reply to a question which the reader may perhaps have asked, viz. why we have not at the beginning of this second Part discussed the question as to whether slavery is ever a phenomenon of genuine savage life, or has always been due to intercourse with higher races. We have not done so, because it seems to us that this question is one of secondary interest. When we see that among a savage tribe slavery is an institution playing a great part in native life and slave labour is of much use, we must come to the conclusion that slavery is perfectly consistent with the economic and social state in which this tribe lives, whether intercourse with superior races gave rise to it or it already existed before any such intercourse had taken place. And the conclusions we have arrived at in this and the foregoing chapters, as to the various circumstances [[412]]which further or prevent slavery, remain the same in both cases. Moreover, there are some savage tribes which at the time of their discovery kept slaves without, so far as we know, having had any intercourse with superior races: the New Zealanders and the fishing tribes of Kamchatka and the North Pacific Coast of North America.