limites des terrains familiaux ou de clans et de leur justification traditionnelle' [is the repository of the details of the boundaries of family or clan land and of its traditional justification] (Guiart 1954:9). Thus social relations were based on a model of a social contract which encoded significant structural tension and which could be renegotiated (Douglas 1979; Bensa and Rivierre 1982; Bensa 1986).15 Leenhardt aptly represented this relationship in the Loyalties as evinced in the offering of firstffuit:
The soil does not belong to the chief but to the first occupants. These people do not have to offer firstfruits. Aren't they the ones who approved the foreign immigrant and suggested the chieftainship to him? W hereas the chief is sacred and no one may approach him, these men, the first occupants, m ay touch him and taste his food ... Their quality of landed property owners is thus recognised by all the chiefs kinsm en who occupy their lands and offer the owners the firstfruits o f their harvests. And they, the masters of the soil, who owe nothing to the chief, nevertheless lay aside a portion of what they receive and take it to him. This is not a tribute but an offering, a token of fidelity (Leenhardt 1979 [1947]: 119, English version).
Today in Drueulu everyone acknowledges the first two inhabitants of the place just as everyone agrees on the fact that the anga joxu is an ’outsider’. Yet both men and women think that the non-native origin of the high chief should be ’not spoken of too loud’.16 But people's knowledge and accounts of how the
trenadro have defined the position of newcomers and land use rights are vastly distinction between the Loyalty Islands and the main island of New Caledonia. In the latter case, chiefs 'were quasi-divine men whose essential task was to orate and exalt tribal history' (Howe, 1977:165, ft32). Further, in this context, the nobility did not have the prominent role that it had in the Loyalty Islands (Howe 1977:165, ft.34).
15 I find Arendt's (1963) distinction between two kinds of 'social contract' pertinent here. She argues that the natural law theorists assembled into a single social covenant two 'mutually exclusive' alternatives of contract. One is a horizontal version, the other a vertical version. She explains the former as:
[t]he mutual contract by which people bind themselves together in order to form a community ... its result is indeed a 'society' or 'cosociation' in the old Roman sense of
societas, which means alliance. The latter, on the contrary:
the so-called social contract between a given society and its ruler ... deal[s] with a fictitious, aboriginal act on the side of each member, by virtue of which he gives up his isolated strength and power to constitute a government; far from gaining a new power ... he resigns his power as it is, and far from binding himself through promises, he merely expresses his 'consent' to be ruled by the government (1963:169).
She continues by saying that this kind of social contract needs to be legitimized by God, whereas the mutual contract is 'by definition enacted "in the presence of one another" ' (1963:170). In
Drehu trepen [foundation, base, bottom] is used in expressions such as trepen huliwa, trepen
utin or kola nyii trepen meaning that in order to do work properly they must respect the principles at the basis of their society.
different. In Lifu, as Bensa and Rivierre have argued for the centre-north of the main island, Kanak still use 'strategies complexes de changement de nom accompagnees de manipulation de genealogie et d ’itineraire [complex strategies of changing names accompanied by manipulation of genealogy and itinerary] (1982:119). This genealogical flexibility is manifest not just in colonial history, but in recent controversies and dealings about land tenure on the island. Today such fluidity can serve to reinforce chiefly power, to renegotiate relations between indigenous and Christian domains and/or to reaffirm the language of identity (see Chapter Seven).
There are two trenadro in Drueulu. This fits Guiarfs generalisation that in Lifu the lineages of the masters of the soil go 'toujours par deux' [always in pairs]
(1992a:223). Their origin is enmeshed with that of the land:
We were the first to emerge at the same time that land emerged. This is according to legend, but it continues to be recognized, that we are the masters o f the soil. Land belongs to us because we emerged from this land and we were the first to occupy it. The legend, according to our grandfathers, was that in the past when the earth started to emerge nobody was there. They were far away, deep in the forest. As the earth progressively emerged, the ancestors followed the sea. Because as the earth emerged the sea lowered. The sea withdrew. The waves crashed on the sand and they were carried in by
the waves. That is iwaaziluzilu
(Haijengo Haluatr, recorded
interview, March 1992).
C'etait nous qui [etions] les premiers qui [sortions] au meme temps que la terre. Qa selon la legende, mais c'est rest6 quelque chose de reconnu par la suite jusqu'd present que nous sommes des terriens. La terre nous appartient parce que nous sommes sortis de cette terre et nous sommes les premiers ä occuper cette terre. La legende disait, d'aprts notre grand- pire, qu' autrefois lorsque la terre commenqait ä 6merger il y avait per sonne. I Is etaient loin, tout ä fa it dans laforet. Aprds la terre, ä fur et ä mesure qu'elle montait, les vieux ils ont suivi la mer. Parce que la mer est descendue au fu r et ä mesure que la terre Emerge ait: La mer s'est retirie. Les vagues viennent s'^eraser dans le sable. C'est Id qu' on sefa it entrainer par les vagues. C'est Id qu'on
iwaaziluzilu.17
When Alaxutren, the apical ancestor from whom the actual high chief Zeula traces his descent, arrived from We at Drueulu, the master of the soil was Wacako. He accepted Alaxutren and handed over the chiefdom, retiring to Drosi, 'le lieu de son Emergence' [the place from which he had emerged] (Haijengo Haluatr, March 1992). Alaxutren is the term still used by the tixe ne lapa [clan chiefs] in addressing the anga joxu. At the time of early contacts with Europeans Zeula was the high chief of Gaica.18 Wacako is recognized as the master of the
17 The narrator is explaining to me the origin of their name, Wazilutr. This name was changed in the 1950s when the French Administration obliged every Kanak to be registered under a family name.
18 In oral accounts people acknowledge the mediating role of Gaica in the tension and war between the larger and more populated Wetr to the North and Lösi to the South. Though some missionaries before 1860s in their correspondence refer to 'two tribes', the autonomous position of the chiefdom of Gaica not being apparent to them, Father Fabre speaks of 'three tribes' (Fabre to Poupinel 24 October 1859, APM/ONC 208) and Gaide in 1861, well before French annexation,
writes that the island is divided 'en trois tribus, chacune d son grand chef independant' [in three
tribes, each one has its own independent chief] (Gaide to Favre, 20 January 1861, APM/ONC 208). This contradicts the position that asserts that the chief of Gaica was appointed as an
independent chief by the French authority in 1864 (Notes Historiques). The view of Gaica as
having a 'subordinate chief is espoused also by Ray (1917:290). The term Gaica for some people
derives from gaithew where the we means partager [to share]; for an informant it derives from
land who has 'accepted' Zeula,19 but who should assume this named position20 today is a highly sensitive and controversial matter. Many questions are at issue: interpreting the meaning contained in the name Wacako; the legitimation of its descendants and of adopted members; the status of previous people who had taken that named position: half man-half spirit from the Grande Terre who possessed stronger magical powers than the first inhabitants and came answering their call (Sipo, July 1990). When the latter moved from Drueulu to Drosi, he left 'tous les medicaments' [all his medicines] under the sine ta i Wacako, a short wooden stake driven into the ground in front of the umepö, the large hut within the chiefly compound used for gatherings. The former anga joxu decided to replace it with a flagpole.21 The same woman commented: 'Maintenant il faut que la France lui donne ä manger. Avant la nourriture arrivait toute seule ä la chefferie' [Now France needs to feed him. Before all the food came by itself to the chefferie]. She stressed that changes have taken place and people do not take offerings and gifts to Feneiwewe (the chiefly compound) as they used to. This strong critique of the removal of the sine ta i Wacako by the former anga joxu
carries different messages; it recalls that the high chief is not a trenadro as Wacako is, and that the two have different relations vis-d-vis land and people. In fact by challenging Wacako's magical powers over the land the chief had to rely on the colonizers' help whereas in the past he could rely on indigenes supplying him. Further it is a comment on the former high chiefs decision to replace the late chief of the Lapa i Ange Triji (clan of the land owners, see below), Sipo's father, without previous consultations with the other trenadro.
Today descent is traced in the male line and a pattem of patri-virilocal residence prevails but this is complicated by the fact that lineages are ranked according to their seniority of descent based on birth order. Each descent group has senior and junior branches. This pattern seems to have prevailed in the past as well (Howe 1977:9-10). The eldest male of the active senior generation is considered tixe of the lineage. He is the one who speaks on its behalf and organizes the customary 'work' performed by the lineage:22 when the lineage acts
19 In narrating the arrival of Zeula, people always emphasized that Wacako 'accepted' him, thus Zeula's presence was not imposed on him.
20 Guiart refers to these positions as titres [titles] (1963:640), but I prefer to call them named positions. I consider it a less historically charged term.
21 This replacement was undertaken by the father of the present day anga joxu.
22 Huliwa cil is the term Kanak use to talk about activities that require communal involvement where people have specific obligations depending on their status, function or role in that context.
as a corporate group, the junior branches gather at the place of residence of the elder of the senior branch. In principle all members of the senior line are senior to all members of junior lineages; but many strategies work to make this system very flexible. Adoption is one of the strategies used to enhance this flexibility, as in the past were warfare, shifting allegiance, and migration. Ray explained that the relationship of the eldest vis-d-vis his younger siblings was framed in both social and kinship terms. The elder brother was called 'master (tixe) or father (kem)' (1917:200). This way of defining social relations through kinship idioms persists. Kanak translate tixe as 'chief; clan chief, lineage leader, plus grand
[someone bigger]'; and jin as younger brother or sister or 'sujets, executeurs, main d'oeuvre' [subjects, executors, labourers] (Haluatr).23 The use of these two terms is very interesting. In fact tixe always refers to men, except if interim leadership is necessary, when a widow can act as tixe. In the past there are accounts of women who have assumed such power during interregna. Speaking of the high chief of Gaica, Father Gaide writes that he 'est un enfant de 12 d 13 ans; c'est sa märe qui gouverne' [is a child of 12 or 13 years and it is his mother who rules] (Gaide to Favre, 20 January 1861, APM/ONC 208). Pastor MacFarlane refers to the same situation stressing that the young successor of the deceased high chief Zeula 'was only a boy about nine or ten years of age, so the lad's mother became regent' (1873:61). But this apparently clear-cut distinction that could result in a simplistic dualistic model of chief:elder:male [tixe) and subject:junior:the two sexes [jin), becomes more complex in context.
In conveying the vitality of their socio-political system, Kanak always emphasize that a principle of equilibrium smooths the structural tension of this very sophisticated and flexible organization. Authority and respect are stressed as well as reciprocity. Where authority resides depends on the context: generally speaking men have more authority, but in a meeting young unmarried men must respect the authority of elderly women. Within a lineage the eldest male member has authority, the right to speak, yet the youngest male is 'highly respected’. What is peculiar to this principle of seniority/juniority is the status of the youngest male member of a lineage: he is called qatr [elder]. This parallel between first and last
In French they speak of 'travail [work], the notion of 'customary' being implied. Even in town
people talk of 'travail to refer to work with mutual obligations. Xatuaa means 'donner la main'
[to help] and refers instead to help provided by a relative, a friend. The implications of the two words are quite different
23 But cf. Bensa and Rivierre (1982:74) where the relationship chief/subject is subverted in the
kinship terminology of elder son/father. In Lifu the relationship between the anga joxu and the
bom in the male line in terms of respect and privilege is not duplicated in kinship terminology where they are referred to by distinctive terms. The designation of
qatr and the privilege it confers is acknowledged by both men and women, though it applies only to men. As a Drueulu man living in Noumda told me: 'Ils doivent me considerer comme leur vieux. J ’occupe une place importante'. [They should consider me as their elder. I occupy an important place] (Haijengo Haluatr, recorded interview, April 1992). People explain it in terms of balancing otherwise uneven relations and diminishing tension, though the same man on a previous occasion had told me:
In terms o f customs this is tough, no doubt about it. It is the eldest who makes the decision. Generally there is no contention ... perhaps some discussion but not contention ... Now as I am telling you we are beginning to change ... Now everybody speaks, the eldest, the second, the third, the last one, everybody speaks; but in the past nobody could speak except for the eldest o f the family (Haijengo Haluatr, recorded interview, March
1992).
Coutumiirement qa c’est strict, pas de discussions. C’est Vaini qui prend la decision. Normalement il y a pas de contestation ... peut-etre des
discussions mais pas de
contestations. ... Maintenant je vous dis nous rentrons dans revolution ... Tout le monde maintenant parle, l’ainö, le deuxitme, le troisiime, le dernier, tout le monde parle, mais autrefois il y a personne qui doit parier, il y a que Taine de la famille
qui parle.
This principle, which stresses equilibrium within a hierarchical social organization, still influences contemporary interaction and operates in daily life. I recall a raffle organized by the Protestant women's group of Lifu in 1990 in which the first and the 10th and last prize were both a hand-made straw mat of the same value. This tendency to counterbalance the power of the eldest with that of the youngest suggests that the notion of hierarchy and rank is not rigid and is always subject to qualification.