In the 18th century, Barthélémy Huet de Froberville translated the terms ‘government’ and ‘power’ as ‘Fiandria’ in his ‘Manuscript Dictionary of Madagascar’. Although the missionary never set foot on the Great Island, he relied on the accounts of various travelers and authors. Citing Fressanges, he noted that forms of government varied by province. While power was generally hereditary, ambition often defied laws.
Fressanges highlighted that the Ankova and Sakalava regions lived under extreme despotism, where chiefs held the power of life and death over their subjects. In other regions, criminal justice was governed by local customary laws. While each village had a chief, regional governance was often decentralized, with leaders emerging based on capability, bravery, and wealth rather than absolute rule.
According to Flacourt, the Malagasy nation lacked written laws, relying instead on natural laws categorized into the prince’s will (‘massindili’), individual rights (‘massinpoh’), and local customs (‘massintane’). The prince’s authority was balanced by tradition; if a ruler’s command contradicted ancestral customs, subjects could challenge it, leaving the prince with no recourse.
The governance structure across the island was largely feudal. In the south, this system often led to constant warfare, forcing subjects to abandon their lands. Land ownership was theoretically vested in the kings or chiefs, though individuals could secure permanent rights to plots through long-term cultivation. However, Flacourt warned that southern lords were fiercely protective of their territory and required formal requests for land usage.
Captured & Published at: 2026-08-11 06:39:11 (Madagascar Local Time EAT)
Original Source: https://www.lexpress.mg/2026/08/les-pouvoirs-madagascar-vus-par-les.html