El Libro infinido Reflejo de la vertiente más íntima de don Juan Manuel

Pohnpeians view their island’s modern political system as simply the most recent in a series of historically evolving political formats (Petersen 2009:143).

Pohnpeians understand the present as a product of history, and as such the current form of socio-political organization and political boundaries are the product of long-term development and change (Falgout 1984; Mauricio 1993). The history of this development is complex and variable from district to district. Therefore, this overview focuses on general island-wide trends rather than localized specifics.

97 |

“Pohnpeian oral traditions report that the formation of small dispersed polities and their eventual unification and disintegration were accompanied by a transition from

religious/ideological to secular means of control” (Mauricio 1993:2). Petersen (1990a) notes that linguistic evidence suggests that the original settlers of Pohnpei may have had relatively little hierarchy, but they likely had a set of values and/or beliefs to guide their behavior. Local chiefdoms developed from matrilineal clans; these chiefdoms were headed by priest-leaders in many locations (Bernart 1977; Dobbin 2011; Falgout 1990; Fischer et al. 1977; Hambruch 1936c; Kubary 1874; Mauricio 1993; Petersen 1990a).

Secularization of the Pohnpeian socio-political system occurred during the Saudeleur Period, though the process was not complete until the early Nahnmwarki period (Dobbin 2011; Mauricio 1993). Initially, the Saudeleur rulers were seen as religious and secular leaders, but over time the Saudeleur ceased direct participation in many religious events (e.g. turtle ceremony) allowing the priesthood to develop autonomy outside the political hierarchy. This created a division between sacred and secular roles. Some of the old priestly titles were subsumed into the secular title system over time, particularly after the introduction of Christianity (Bernart 1977; Dobbin 2011; Falgout 1990; Riesenberg 1968).

In spite of the information available about traditional socio-political organization, it is not clear how much power chiefs had over individuals (Petersen 1982a, 1989b). It is clear that the priest-leaders established at least some centralized control over communities through simultaneous ritual and economic endeavors prior to the Saudeleur (Mauricio 1993). According to Mauricio (1993:345), “religious beliefs and ideologies transgressed into the secular experiences of the people and became political instruments in the form of sanctified power and authority.” This co-opting of religious authority opened the socio-political system up to further centralization, which culminated with the Saudeleur Dynasty (Mauricio 1993). Even though the religion and ideology were used by the Saudeleur to gain legitimacy, later rulers of the Dynasty distanced themselves from the religion their early counterparts introduced.

98 |

The degree of centralization that the Saudeleur Dynasty actually achieved is unclear, though the chiefs of the other polities were given new titles by the Saudeleur and were expected to pay tribute (Bryson 1989; Mauricio 1993). There is no definitive evidence that the Saudeleur attempted to influence the hierarchical structure or the daily functioning of these smaller chiefdoms (Bernart 1977; Bryson 1989). Over time the demands of the Saudeleur for tribute and service increased to the point where they were affecting daily life on Pohnpei (e.g. limiting food available to families due to quantities required for tribute) (Bernart 1977; Hanlon 1988a). The decentralization of socio-political power occurred after the Nahnmwarki system replaced the Saudeleur in Madolenihmw. Based on genealogical information of the

Madolenihmw chiefs, this decentralization process probably occurred between AD 1600 and AD 1700 (Mauricio 1993:163).

After the Saudeleur was deposed most of the polities reverted to their traditional leadership systems. One example of this is Kiti, which reverted to its previous leadership system until the Battle of Sapwtakai after which the district was unified and the Nahnmwarki system was adopted (see Bernart 1977). On the other hand, in Madolenihmw a new system of leadership, the Nahnmwarki system, developed, which was designed to limit potential abuses of chiefly authority by establishing two series of titles (Bath and Athens 1990; Bernart 1977; Hanlon 1988a; Mauricio 1993). These leadership positions of Nahnmwarki and Nahnken were ascribed to two separate clans, effectively permitting “the formation of an internally

decentralized socio-political structure in the form of paralleling leadership positions”

(Mauricio 1993:62). What was novel about this system was the creation of two secular series of titles, which eventually incorporated priestly titles as well. The Nahnmwarki system is built on the foundations of previous socio-political entities, and was not entirely divergent from past hierarchies (Ehrlich 1978). The Nahnmwarki performed the same duties as other chiefs and had the same requirements for his subjects. What is unique about this social system is that any potential abuse of power was kept in check by the Nahnken, who could intercede on

99 |

the behalf of the people or in their best interest. The presence of two lines of titles meant that there was also more opportunity for social advancement.

Over time the Nahnmwarki system spread from Madolenihmw to other polities through both adoption and conflict (Bernart 1977; Mauricio 1993). This transition was slow, as there were several polities with different hierarchical title systems in place in the 1800s and into the 1900s (Dobbin 2011; Ehrlich 1978; Hanlon 1988a; Petersen 1982a, 1990a, 2009; Riesenberg 1968). Colonial influences did much to progress the adoption of the Nahnmwarki system, especially German colonial reforms in the early 20th century. Now that the

Nahnmwarki system is the only remaining traditional socio-political system, place-names and oral traditions are the living remnants of these previous socio-political units (Petersen 1982a; see Ayres and Mauricio 1997 and Panholzer and Mauricio 2003 for specific examples).

Although more than a century of western contact has taken place on Pohnpei, the socio-political system on the island has adapted without abandoning its basic structure or principles (Hanlon 1988a; Hughes 1968; Petersen 1984, 1989b). “Resistance to foreign intrusion became part” of Pohnpeian culture, while they continued to incorporate selected foreign material culture and ideas (Hanlon 1988a:206). The traditional socio-political system was never particularly static and continually adapted over the course of Pohnpeian history without significantly impacting on what it meant to be Pohnpeian.