The seeming contradiction between Viehe and Kohler’s authorities [[146]]might be solved, if we attend to the following remark, made by Kohler on Büttner’s authority: “The practical possibility for the slaves of escaping from their master is the best warrant for good treatment[562].” We may infer from this that, when Viehe says that the slaves can at any time return to their own country, it is only meant that it is easy from them to do so (as among a pastoral and nomadic nation it is likely to be), not that they are permitted to do so by law or custom.
The conclusion is that the Ovaherero keep slaves.
Among the Batoka the slave-trade had in Livingstone’s time been lately introduced[563]. We are not told whether they kept slaves themselves.
The Barotse have slaves; this is proved by the statements of several writers[564].
In the descriptions of the Makalaka no mention is made of slavery, so they probably have no slaves[565].
The Manansa are not fond of fighting[566], so they probably make no prisoners. They might have purchased slaves; but as nothing is told us of slavery amongst them, the probability is against this.
The Kimbunda have an elaborate slave-system, minutely described by Magyar[567].
The Lovalé people have the reputation of being harsh task-masters. Slaves are procured by exchange from abroad[568]. These short notes are all the evidence we know of, bearing on the existence of slavery among them.
The people of Lunda are great slave-traders. Several details given by our informants prove that they also keep slaves for their own use[569].
In the neighbouring country of Cazembe there are two social classes: the nobility and the Muzias or servants, including peasants, artisans, etc. Both classes are called slaves of the Muata (king); this of course is not slavery proper. All men able to fight must go to war; but this does not affect the [[147]]cultivation of the land, which is carried on by the women only[570]. These statements make the existence of slavery improbable.