§ 17. Other secondary internal causes.

We have seen that among the tribes of the Pacific Coast of North America the growth of slavery is furthered by their preserving food for the time of scarcity, whereas hunters who live from hand to mouth have less use for slave labour.

Hunting agriculturists much resemble true hunters: subsistence depends largely on the vicissitudes of the chase. But where a tribe lives principally on the produce of the soil, it is necessary to preserve the reaped fruits until the following harvest.

This leads to the same conclusion we had already arrived at, that slavery is more likely to exist among agriculturists of the higher stages than among hunting agriculturists. [Among hunting agriculturists we have found 34 positive and 43 negative cases; among agriculturists of the higher stages 136 positive and 52 negative cases.] We do not think that anything more need be said on this subject.

 

In our chapter on pastoral tribes we have found that subjection of tribes as such sometimes serves as a substitute for slavery, making slavery proper superfluous. The same proved to be the case among agriculturists who depend on cattle for a large portion of their subsistence. Something analogous to this is the levying of tributes on conquered districts that so often occurs in Oceania, as we have found in § 8. Outside Oceania we have found only one instance among agriculturists who do not depend on cattle, and even this is a doubtful one. Morgan states that among the Iroquois the council "regulated the affairs of subjugated tribes" [Morgan, Anc. Soc, p. 136.]; but he does not enter into more details, so we cannot exactly know what he means.

It is easy to understand, why subjection of tribes so seldom occurs among agriculturists. Hunting agriculturists, like true [407] hunters, generally live in small groups and therefore cannot keep other tribes in a state of subjection. And among agricultural tribes of the higher stages men as well as women are continually engaged in agricultural labour; they are attached to the spot on which they live and, unlike nomadic cattle-keepers [See Salvioli's article on the struggles between pastoral and agricultural peoples.], cannot easily control a neighbouring tribe. The vanquished tribe, by retreating a little, can place itself out of reach of the conquering tribe. Only where, as on the small Polynesian islands, escape is not practicable, can a vanquished district be kept in a state of subjection. The Iroquois were an exceptional case. They were hunting agriculturists in this sense, that agricultural labour was performed by the women only; but at the same time they had a strong military organization: the five nations formed a powerful union.

In the higher stages of culture the growth of militarism enables strong agricultural peoples to subject their weaker neighbours; and the growth of population prevents the latter from receding. But among agricultural savages subjugation of tribes is rarely found.