Another important source for our knowledge of precolonial warfare is the indigenous stories about lapans in the past. During my fieldwork on Baluan (Fig. 2) from 1986 to 1988 I collected a considerable number of these stories, many of them on tape. These stories are the property of the houses that descend from the lapans concerned and are rarely told in public.4They are handed down from generation to
generation within the lineage. However, as they often go back six or more generations, during which groups split up, moved and became autonomous, there are generally several houses that guard the memory of the same lapan. My collection has there- fore allowed me to cross-check central events and names and has revealed both consistency and inter- esting differences in perspective.
A common theme of these stories is how lapans received their status and power, because it appears
that many lapans in fact were not of noble birth, as the cultural rule would have it, but obtained their status through other means. One way was adoption. The forefather of the two strongest clans of the largest village on Baluan drifted as a boy from main- land Manus to the island. Here he was found and later adopted by two lapans who did not have a son themselves. Another founder of a lapan line was a war captive who was bought by a Baluan leader and later given to another lapan for adoption. These two boys became strong warriors and protectors of their houses and clans according to the oral traditions that guard their memory (Otto 1991: 59-60). In addition to adoption, marriage was also an important strate- gy to link a strong person to a house and it could be used as a means of transferring the lapan status. In the following I will follow one such lapan story in some detail as an example of the kind of informa- tion it contains. I have five tape-recorded versions of the story but will use only one, as the differences are not relevant in the present context. The chosen version was told by the undisputed leader of the house and direct descendant of the founding father, whose story is told. Unlike some other stories, which involve contemporary disputes, it appears unprob- lematic to present this story in written form. The nar- rator is Kalai Poraken, lapan of the Yongkul house and the acknowledged traditional leader of the vil- lage of Parioi at the time of my fieldwork.
Kalai begins the story by relating how two brothers got into a quarrel about the fruits of a breadfruit tree. One of the brothers, Marankopat, decides to leave and goes to the lineage of his mother. His mother’s brother takes him in, raises him and organises his marriage. What follows is a verbatim translation of the rest of the story:
In those days the side of Lipan would often attack the side of Mun, which are the people of Sone, Parioi, Perelik, and Manuai.5
The men of Lipan would capture some people of Mun and sell them to the islanders of Lou for obsidian and wooden bowls. The people of Lou would then eat the Baluan captives.
All right, Marankopat used to hear this when he still lived in Munukut.6He was married now and he asked his uncles to
build a house. They made a house for him. They erected the houseposts and put the rest on it. While they were still working on it, the men of Lipan went up the mountain to Manuai village. They chased away the people7and caught one boy.
They put him on a bed and four men carried him. They went down along the road in Pumaliok on their way to Lipan.
The mother of the boy was crying and called the name of Marankopat. Marankopat took all his spears and ran to Pumaliok. When he met the men of Lipan carrying the boy, he killed one with his spear. They left the boy and fled, taking the dead body with them. Marankopat untied the boy and called the mother to come from Manuai and get her child back. The mother came and received the child. Marankopat went back to his uncles who were building his house. He said to them: ‘The name of this house you are making is Yongkul’. Then he told them the name of the spear with which he killed a man of Lipan: ‘The name of this spear is Kumkilamut’. The uncles finished the house, which was now called Yongkul. The meaning of Yongkul, leaf of the breadfruit tree, is that it protects you from sun and rain. Therefore, the house was called Yongkul. If the men of Lipan would come again the people of Mun could find protection under this house. The meaning of the name of the spear, Kumkilamut, is that the east side (Kum) could not come to fight any more and kill the people of Mun because there was a strong man to chase them away.
Kalai goes on to relate his line of descent from Marankopat (see Fig. 3). Another version tells how the latter was married to the daughter of a lapan of an important house in Parioi, who transferred lapan status to Marankopat after he had demonstrated prowess in fighting. The next episode of the story describes how a descendant of Marankopat moved to the village of Manuai to found another lapan house, called PulianPaluai. The name literally means ‘mountain of Baluan’ and was intended to claim the highest status for this house. Kalai recounts that Marankopat’s son Keket had two sons, Popol and Ngi Kuian. The wives of the two brothers had an argument (apparently a common theme in lapan stories) and Kuian decided to leave the village of Parioi. He went to Manuai, taking his lapan status with him. His line of descendants has provided the leading lapan of Manuai ever since. The third episode concerns a fight between the houses of Yongkul and PulianPaluai. Kalai’s verbatim account continues below.
Version 1 (Kalai)
▲ Marankopat ––––––– ▲ Keket ––––––– ▲ Popol –––––– ▲ Poruan –––– ▲ Poraken –– ▲Kalai ▲ Ngi Kuian –– ▲ Aliokui
● Palmai
▲ H. Sapat –– ▲ Tuwain ––– Yamet (MBuke)
Version 2 (Manuai 1)
▲ Marankopat ▲ Keket ––––––– ▲ Popol –––––– ▲ Poruan –––– ▲ Poraken –– ▲Kalai
● W. Posiam ▲ Ngi Kuian ––– ▲ Kanau –––––– ▲ Aliokui
(Pumutmut) ● Palmai –––––– ▲ Tuwain –––– Yamet
Version 3 (Manuai 1 and Poipoi 2)
▲ Keket Kopat ▲ Popol ––––––– ▲ Poruan ––––– ▲ Poraken ––– ▲Kalai
● W1 Tumulen ▲ Assungkiau
(Parioi)
● W2 Malemal ▲ Kuian ▲ Kanau –––––– ▲ Aliokui
(Manuai) ● W1 (Leut) ▲ Ngi
● W2 Lil ● Palmai ––– ▲ Tuwain –––– Yamet –––– ▲Kondai
▲ H. Sapat (MBuke)
All right, this clan split into two parts. One part went to Manuai and was called Umtan Kuian and the other stayed in Parioi and was called Umtan Popol.8I will now talk about the time
of Aliokui and Poruan. The two had the following dispute. Aliokui wanted to be the head lapan and Poruan said: ‘No, I am in the original lineage of the lapan and I remain the head’. This dispute came up and Aliokui looked for a way to kill Poruan. Poruan went to the bush to work in his garden. Poruan had two wives. One was called Posiam and the other Sapou. In the afternoon they returned from their work and they were ambushed by Aliokui and his line. They fought and Poruan was killed. Poruan was carrying his son Poraken. When his father died Poraken fell onto the ground and a stone wall broke down and covered him. The group of Aliokui did not kill Poraken. Poraken stayed alive.
All right, the people of Parioi wanted to take revenge on Umtan Kuian for the murder of Poruan. When they were mourning for Poruan and killed pigs for this purpose, they took a prime part of a pig and put an obsidian dagger inside it. They sent this to Umtan Palasip because a woman of Yongkul had been married to this house. They followed this woman when they sent the dagger to Umtan Palasip.9Palasip cut the
piece of pig and found the dagger. He called his people and said: ‘We have a big thing at hand now because they have sent us this dagger’. They wondered who would be fit to eat the piece of pig. One person was very skilled in throwing the spear. His name was Kanau. He has descendants who live in Manuai now. They told him: ‘You must eat this piece of pig and kill Aliokui’. All right, they went to the lapang, which is the place where they practised fighting. Palasip told Kanau now: ‘If you do not shoot at Aliokui, I will shoot you’. When they were ready to go, Aliokui called Kanau and said: ‘Let us go to the fight’. They went and some others stayed behind, because it was a practice ground and many people went there to practise or to watch. Aliokui threw his spears up the hill and the people there dodged them. Then the people uphill shot their spears and the group of Aliokui moved backwards. When they wanted to go uphill again, Kanau hit Aliokui with his spear. One of the people on the hillside called out that they had killed a man. The people thought that someone from above had killed Aliokui, but this was a trick.10Someone
from below had shot him. This was to pay back the murder of Poruan by the line of Aliokui.
This short story about the house of Yongkul contains a wealth of relevant information about practices of violent conflict and warfare. In the first place one can discern different types of warfare. The villages of the east (Kum) were in a permanent relation of enmi- ty with the villages of the west (Mun). This relation
would often take a formalised or ritualised form, as on the practice ground, or could lead to incidental raids on enemy territory leading to killings, destruc- tion of property, and the taking of captives. From other oral sources we know that periods of (relative) peace alternated with periods of war. At the time of the German punitive raid on the island in 1900 (see above) the pressure from the west on the east was so great that one clan had found it necessary to build a palisade around its settlement. In the German raid this palisade as well as the whole village was destroyed (oral information). Also the murdering of whole villages is kept in memory. There were always some people who escaped and found shelter with other clans. Their descendants were called puanin, the fruits of war. The villagers of Baluan lived uphill and away from the coast because they were afraid of raids from the Titan people, who would come in their big seagoing canoes. In remembered history several groups of Titan people settled very close to the Baluan coast, obviously with permission from the locals with whom they entered relations of exchange, in particular trading fish for garden produce. It is likely that these Titan groups also provided a kind of protection against raids from other Titan groups. Clearly, Titan groups were in competition (and some- times at war) with each other for privileged access to agricultural villages.11
Violent conflict could also arise between closely related descent groups. In the story related above we have an example of an ambush in which close relatives were killed by the aggressors. Deceit and ruse were commonplace. One story relates how one group (Luibuai) was invited by another (Muiou) to a gathering with the stated purpose of commemo- rating a dead relative. Once the guests were seated, all in pairs, one guest next to one host, they were attacked and killed with daggers which the hosts had hidden in their curly hair. The reason given for this is that the Muiou wanted to take revenge on the Luibuai for using a kind of decoration that was considered as the Muiou’s property. The dominant Muiou were thus prepared to defend one of their privileges in this bloody way. It is perhaps doubtful whether these kinds of events should be called war, but they certainly often resulted in one. For example, the killing of Aliokui at the practice ground (see above) led to a ferocious war between the people of Mun and the falsely accused Munukut, who were severely beaten.
A central theme that is well illustrated by the Yongkul story is the close connection between lead- ership and prowess in battle. Marankopat became the leader of a lapan house because of his warring qualities and similar explanations permeate stories about other lapans. It appears that at a time when warfare was ubiquitous, being a good warrior was the decisive quality for a leader. Even though my informants emphasised that lapanship was heredi- tary, the historical narratives they told me point out that hereditary leaders used the means at their dis- posal to get strong and aggressive men into the fam- ily, namely, adoption and marriage. I was also told that strong and warlike leaders would fill their fol- lowers with fear and therefore were able to exact more obedience and support than other leaders. My investigation into the use of lapan titles (Otto 1994a) supports the present argument about the centrality of warfare in issues of leadership: the leaders of dominant clans all had titles relating to warfare, whereas lapans who had only titles referring to peace belonged to less powerful groups.12
An important aspect of leadership is the strong competition for status between leaders of descent groups. In the story above, this competition between closely related leaders leads to killing and warfare. Status competition appears to be a very strong motive in Manus societies (see Schwartz 1963). It often caused groups to split as one leader would not accept the dominance of another. This competition not only engendered frequent violent conflicts but also caused the groups involved in these conflicts to remain rel- atively small. Fission of descent groups was the order of the day and fusion happened only when defeat- ed groups were too small to defend themselves and had to join another, larger group for survival.
Clearly the quest for status was an important motive for going into war and the demonstration of prowess was probably a means to prevent others from attacking one’s own group. But warfare also provided other, more material spoils. There was of course booty, but also dead bodies that could be eaten or traded for coveted materials. In the story it is specif- ically mentioned that human meat was exchanged for obsidian, necessary for warfare, and wooden bowls from Lou. This was a common theme and explanation in many other Baluan stories. Finally, warfare could provide human labour. On Baluan I did not hear any stories about keeping captive women as prostitutes, but there is frequent mention
of adoption or the keeping of captives as dependents. In some cases this would eventually lead to exchange relations with the groups from which the captives originated.
A final and crucial point concerns the nature of relationships and networks in the case of warfare. In the story of the murder of Aliokui, the people of Parioi used an ally in the clan of the victim to execute the revenge. In this case an affinal relationship was obviously considered as more important than clan allegiance and the obligation established through marriage was thus able to override the collaboration and loyalty required between members of the same clan. Because the identity of the real murderer was kept hidden and another clan got the blame, a war within the clan was avoided. But the episode clearly supports Mead’s observation that individuals on Manus could invoke different kinds of relation- ships in the pursuit of their strategic aims (Mead 1961[1937]; Schwartz 1963).