Polynesian origins of the indigenous Fijian Caste System

A True Open Forum; Share/Discuss whatever you like
Vutulaki-san

Polynesian origins of the indigenous Fijian Caste System

Postby Vutulaki-san » Wed Jan 27, 2016 11:24 pm

For those few of you who arent well versed in Polynesian and Melanesian kulcha let me break some of it down for you.

In most Melanesian kulchas chiefs and other higher ranking individuals are appointed based on personal merit meaning if you cant fight you dont get to be chief, if you dont understand the spirit world you cant be a priest etc

Somewhere during the long time intercourse between the Fijian Melanesian and Tongan Polynesian the Fijians have adopted a system of hereditary appointments also known as the Caste system.

Today we look at the various castes within the Fijian system and later we will explore how the Asiatic betaness of the Polynesian hereditary system brought down the once mighty kings of the pacific.........the Fijians.

Turaga (Pronounced Turanga): This mataqali descends from the original ancestor through primogeniture - inheritance of the eldest son in each succeeding generation. The chief of a village is always chosen from the Turaga mataqali.
Sau turaga: These are next in rank to the chiefs, support him, and enforce his commands and also have final say in the installation of a Chief
Mata ni vanua: These form the official heralds of the village. They are also in charge of ceremonial functions.
Bete: This was the traditional priestly class. The kalou-vu was believed to speak through the Bete.
Bati: This mataqali forms the traditional warrior class.
Dau (skill) and Matai: these are the crafts people and specialized skilled people of the tribe e.g. Dau ni vucu (Poet/choreographer/composer), Dau ni yau (treasurer), Mataisau (carpenter/or Canoe builder)

Like the original Hindu castes these were fluid and based on individual merit, and much like with Hinduism outside influence removed this fluidity out of fear of losing one's place due to third party governance.

Vutulaki-san

Postby Vutulaki-san » Sun Feb 07, 2016 3:14 am

TTT

User avatar
Benwahwah
Posts: 551
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2014 7:45 am
Reputation: 1074

Postby Benwahwah » Sun Feb 07, 2016 4:23 am

You said at the end of your piece that the positions are fluid and based on individual merit; just how much is that the case? Does the caste system only set someone off on their path in life, or is it very firm?

User avatar
Megaterio Llamas
Posts: 4509
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2014 7:56 pm
Reputation: 2674

Postby Megaterio Llamas » Sun Feb 07, 2016 6:22 am

So this intercourse benefited the Tongans more than it did the Fijians then.

How much and what manner of intercourse are we talking about here?
el rey del mambo

User avatar
Megaterio Llamas
Posts: 4509
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2014 7:56 pm
Reputation: 2674

Postby Megaterio Llamas » Sun Feb 07, 2016 6:38 am

Benwahwah wrote:You said at the end of your piece that the positions are fluid and based on individual merit; just how much is that the case? Does the caste system only set someone off on their path in life, or is it very firm?

I believe Vutu is talking about the very early Hindus here Ben. I am also curious to learn who the outside corrupting influences on the early Hindus were.
el rey del mambo

Vutulaki-san

Postby Vutulaki-san » Sun Feb 07, 2016 4:31 pm

Benwahwah wrote:You said at the end of your piece that the positions are fluid and based on individual merit; just how much is that the case? Does the caste system only set someone off on their path in life, or is it very firm?


It was fluid until the Tongans invaded then over time your position was more static

Vutulaki-san

Postby Vutulaki-san » Sun Feb 07, 2016 4:33 pm

Flatus Fowler wrote:
Benwahwah wrote:You said at the end of your piece that the positions are fluid and based on individual merit; just how much is that the case? Does the caste system only set someone off on their path in life, or is it very firm?

I believe Vutu is talking about the very early Hindus here Ben. I am also curious to learn who the outside corrupting influences on the early Hindus were.


Some say the brits but id say earlier Indo European invaders maybe Alexander and his men but probably earlier.

Vutulaki-san

Postby Vutulaki-san » Sun Feb 07, 2016 5:10 pm

Flatus Fowler wrote:So this intercourse benefited the Tongans more than it did the Fijians then.

How much and what manner of intercourse are we talking about here?


Eastern Fiji was a Tongan province.

You wont find many Samoans with a natural fro but plenty of Tongans

User avatar
Megaterio Llamas
Posts: 4509
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2014 7:56 pm
Reputation: 2674

Postby Megaterio Llamas » Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:33 am

The great VS Naipaul simply blames the coming of the Mohammedans for the destruction of India and Hindu civilization (while crediting the Sikhs and the Brits for stabilizing and even restoring things a bit). Following the back and forth between Naipaul and British Islamophiles on this (Naipaul always wins) has been a great pleasure.
el rey del mambo

Vutulaki-san

Postby Vutulaki-san » Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:43 am

Flatus Fowler wrote:The great VS Naipaul simply blames the coming of the Mohammedans for the destruction of India and Hindu civilization (while crediting the Sikhs and the Brits for stabilizing and even restoring things a bit). Following the back and forth between Naipaul and British Islamophiles on this (Naipaul always wins) has been a great pleasure.



There is a lot of truth in that, Indians are always quick to blame the Brits but NEVER say shit about the Muhgal, I guess they dont want residency in the Islamic world


Return to “Anarchy Zone”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests