Political Inequality in the Kababsih Tribe

8/13/2019 Political Inequality in the Kababsih Tribe

1/16

ESSAYS INSUDAN

E T H N O G R A P H Ypresented to

S i r Edward Evans-Pritchardedited by

IAN CUNNISON AND WENDY JAMES

C. HURST & COMPANYLONDON


2/16

First published in the United Kingdom byC. Hurst & Co. (Publishers) Ltd. ,40a Royal Hill , Greenwich, London S. E. 10 1972, C. Hurs t & Co. (Publishers) Ltd.SB N90096654 851644

ITl

Royalties romthe saleof thisvolume willbe contributed tothe Ioma Evans-Pritchard ScholarshipFund,atSt. Ann e'sCollege, Oxford, which wa sestablished inmemoryof thewife of SirEdwardEvans-Pritchard. Itspurposeistosupport continuingresearch inthesocial anthropologyof Africa.

Printed in Czechoslovakia , by Sta tni t iskarna, Prague


3/16

CONTENTSp ge

FOREWORD ixEDITOR S' NOTES xii i

I. Southeastern Nuba Age OrganisationbyJames C.FarisI I . The Politics of Rain Control among the UdukbyWendyJames 31

I I I . Residence among the Bertiby L. Holy 58IV. The Bovine Idiom and Formal LogicbyA. and W.Kronenberg 71V. Proverbs and Social Values in a North ern Su danese Villageby AhmedS.al-Shahi 87

V I . Blood Money, Vengeance and Joint Responsibility: the Baggara caseby IanCunnison 105V I I . Political Inequality in the Kababish TribebyTalalAsad 126

VIII. Nomadism as an Economic Career among theSedentaries of the Sudan Savannah BeltbyGunnarHaaland 149IX . The Rufa'a al-Hoj EconomybyAbdel Ghaffar Mohammed Ahmed 173X. A Rota ting C redit Association in the Thre eTownsby F.Rehfisch 89


4/16

X I . Social Characteristics of Big Mercha nts andBusinessmen in El Obeidby Tajal-Anbia AH al-DawiX I I . The JamG'iya Development Scheme: an essaym the utility of'Instant Anthropology'byPeter Harries-Jones

R E F E R E N C E SI N D E X

F O R E W O R DIn 1926,E. E. Evans-Pritchard arrived for thefirst time in theSudan, after studying under Professors Seligman and Mali-nowski at the London School of Economics. He was to carryon the ethnographic survey work initiated by Charles andBrenda Seligman for the Sudan Government. Between 1909and 1912, the Seligmans had visited the Nuba mountains, theKababish Arabs and the Beja, and in 1921-2 they had carriedout investigations in the south. But they were unable to complete their fieldwork because of illness. Their research hadalready been accepted as valuable, not only in academic termsbut also in a practical way to the administrators of the Sudan.The Sudan Government, and in particular Sir Harold Mac-Michael, Civil Secretary (1926-34), were sympathetic to thistype of field enquiry, and therefore gave Evans-Pritchardevery support in his work. Although his subsequent researchcovered at various times parts of Libya, Egypt, Syria, Ethiopia, the Congo and Kenya, the major body of his field workwas carried out between 1926 and 1936 in the Sudan. TheSudan material is a rich source of ethnographic information,published in seven books and over 150 articles. These writings,together with the later study of the Bedouin of Cyrenaica, formthe basis of Evans-Pritchard's world-wide standing in socialanthropology, an d have attracted the attention of philosophers,psychologists, historians, political scientists and economists.1To indicate adequately the importance of Professor Evans-Pritchard's work would be impossible here, and we are notattempting to do so. But we feel it mig ht be of interest to givea brief chronological outline ofhisvarious Sudan expeditions,based on published m aterial. This fieldwork record is in itselfan outstanding achievement.

1 An authorita tiv e bibliography of Evans -Pritchard's writings appea rsin T. O. Beidelman (ed.) , Th e Translation of Culture, London, Tavistock,1971, pp. 419-34. For the account which follows the main sources usedwere the series of articles he published in Sudan Notes andRecords from1927onwards.


5/16

Political Inequality in theKababish Tribe 127

VIIPOLITIC AL INEQUALITYIN THE KABABISH TRIBE

TalalAsadI

I t has been said by cr i t ics that when modern anthropologis tsta lk in term s of the t r i be , they are ta lk ing abo ut a rapid lyd imin i s h in g wo r ld ( t h e w o r ld o f t h e p r im i t iv e ) , o r mi s r ep r e s en t in g mu ch o f t h e r ea l wo r ld ( t h e Th i r d W o r ld ) ,because there are now very few communit ies , i f any , whichare pol i t ical ly or economical ly iso lated , or whose socialb o u n d a r i e s a r e c l ea r ly an d p e r man en t ly s e t . R eco i l in g f r o mth i s ch a r g e , an th r o p o lo g i s t s h av e r eac ted in a var ie ty of ways .S o me h av e av o id ed th e p r o b lem a l to g e th e r b y ch o o s in g a r easof research which could not in any sense of the word be cal ledt r ib a l . Oth e r s , r e f in in g an o ld e r t r ad i t i o n , h av e ad d r es s edth ems e lv es to th e p r o b lem o f d e f in in g th e t r ib e a s a co mp lexempir ical uni t : they have t r ied to sor t out t ra i ts , t radi t ions ,l inguis t ic and ethnic cr i ter ia , in order to descr ibe moreprecisely the over laps and interconnections b e t w e e n t r i b a luni ts , and to t race the f lu id h is tor ical boundar ies betweens u ch u n i t s , a s we l l as b e twee n u n i t s t h a t a r e d e f in ed a s t r i b a lan d o th e r s d es c r ib ed a s n a t io n a l o r imp er i a l . 1 Final ly ,th e r e h as b een th e a t t em p t to u n d e r s t an d t r ib a l i s m asa n ew p h en o m en o n in i t s o wn r ig h t , i n wh ich th e t r ib e i st r ea t ed a s a co g n i t iv e ca t eg o r y b y wh ich r u r a l immig r an t s i nco s mo p o l i t an mi l i eu x id en t i f y an d r an k th ems e lv es an d eacho th e r . 21 For a recent example, see the collect ion edited by Jun e Helm enti t ledEssays on the Problemof Tribe, Seatt le, Univers i ty of Washingto n Press ,1968.2 Well-known instances in which this problem was firs t systematical lyexplored in the African context include s tudies by M. Gluckman,J . C. Mitchell and A. L. Epstein.

Al th o u g h b o th th es e co n ce r n s h av e p r o v ed wo r th wh i l e ,very few anthropologis ts have t r ied to ident i fy the ideologicals ignif icance of the concep t of t r ibe or i ts equivalents i.e . i tss ignif icance as a concept which , bes ides represent ing a collect ive ident i ty , aspir at ion , and w ay of l i fe, has the qua l i ty ofmasking d iv is ions , contradict ions of in teres t , forms of explo i tat ion , and conf l ic t ing modes of social exper ience. But tounders tand the s ignif icance of concepts in th is way i t isnecessary to cr i t ic ise themi.e . to a t tempt to d iscover the k indo f e r r o r t h ey co n ta in an d wh a t i t s s o c ia l d e t e r min an t s an d co n s e q u en ces a r e . On e r ea s o n wh y th i s ap p r o ach h as n o t fo u n d g en e r a l f avo u r am o n g an th r o p o lo g i s t sisco n n ec ted wi th th e d o c t r in ethat in h is t reatment of indigenous social concepts the socialscient is t may re- in terpret the data but not cr i t ic ise i t . 3 T h es tan d a r d an th r o p o lo g ica l v i ew o n th i s ma t t e r i s we l l r e p r e s en ted in th e f o llo win g r emar k s b y Lea ch : Th e an th r o p o logis t as d is t inct f rom the phi losopher is concerned with whatis the case ra ther than with what ought to be the case. To th isend a d ialect ic of good an d bad , free and unfree seems toop o lemica l . Th e an th r o p o lo g i s t ' s co n ce r n i s n o t wi th r ig h t an dwr o n g b u t wi th r ig h t s an d o b l ig a t io n s . * Th e p o s i t io n t ak enin the present pa per is very different: a l th o u g h i t i s i n ap p r o pr ia te for the anthropologis t to apply arb i t rary labels ofg o o d an d b a d to h i s d a t a , t h e r e i s an imp o r t an t s en s ein whic h wha t is the case in the social wor ld can only beprop er ly under s tood i f one is pre par ed to apply cer ta in cr i t icalstandardswithin wh ich th e f ac tu a l an d mo r a l a s p ec t s can n o talways be c lear ly d is t inguished and, where they can be sodis t inguished, should not be completely severed .

In what fo l lows I a t tempt a br ief expos i t ion and schematicexplanat ion of the s t ructure of pol i t ical inequal i ty in theKa bab ish t r ib e. I do so on the expl ic i t assumption th at noad eq u a te ex p lan a t io n o f t h i s p h en o men o n can b e a t t em p tedu n le s s i t i n co r p o r a t e s a c r i t i c a l ap p r o ach to war d s th e co n cep t s3 Cf. E. Gellner 's paper Concep ts and society inTransactionso ftheFifthWorldCongress of Sociology, Washington, 1962: a valuable discussionof the anthropologis t 's extrem e conceptual tolerance , but one whichdoes not go far enough.4 E. R. Leach, Law as a condit ion of freedom , in D. Bidney (ed.),Th e Concept of Freedom in Anthropology, The Hague , Mouton, 1963,pp. 76-7 .


6/16

128 Essays in Sudan Ethnographythat help to maintain i t , which in the present case are a l la r t i cu la t ed th r o u g h th e ca teg o r i s in g co n cep t o f t r i b e . Th ecr i t ic ism as i t is developed h ere is necessar i ly d irected at threetargets which are connected in a t r iangular re la t ionship ofm u t u a l confirmationthe co lo n ia l ad min i s t r a to r , t h e Kab a bish , and the anthrop ologis t . For the f i r st , the t r ib e as anadminis tra t ive convenience represented a uni t of authent icin teres t , regulated but not shaped by the colonial government .For the second, the t r ib e as an exper ience of s t ructu redinequ al i ty ap pear ed as par t of a jus t and na tur al wor ld ofru lers and ru led . For the th ird , the t r ib e as a theoret ic alco n s t r u c t fo r ap p r o ac h in g th e p r o b lem o f p o l it i c a l d o m in a t io nwas u l t imately based on specif ic assumptions about the natureo f man , a s s u mp t io n s wh ich h e s h a r ed w i th . t h e co lo n ia lad min i s t r a to r t o th e ex ten t t h a t b o th p a r t i c ip a t ed in a co m mo ncultu ral t rad i t ion . The f irs t helped to create , the second toma intai n , and the th ird to val idat e the s t ructure of inequal i tywhich was the t r ibe .

I ITh e p r e s en t p a t t e r n o f p o l i t i c a l i n eq u a l i ty amo n g th e K ab a -bish is the product of h is tor ical c i rcumstances which I havedescr ibed in detai l e lsewhere.5 Here I recapi tu late only themo s t imp o r t an t ev en t s .I n th e e ig h teen th an d n in e teen th cen tu r i e s Ka b ab i s h wasthe name of a loose confederat ion of t r ibes of d iverse or ig inwhich occupied what is now the nor th-wes tern region of theSudan, s t raddl ing three major caravan routes f rom the Nileval ley to Central and Wes tern Afr ica . There was no clear -cutboundary which marked off a g iven set of t r ibes as belongingp e r m an en t ly to th e Kab ab i s h ; g ro u p s ap p ea r to h av ejo ined and lef t the confederat ion at d if ferent per iods , andmig r a t ed f r o m o n e lo ca l i t y to an o th e r . I n th e n in e teen thcen tu r y th e co n fed e r a t io n was h ead ed b y a P a r a mo u n t S h a ik hwh o was r eco g n is ed an d s u p p o r t ed b y th e Tu r c o - Eg y p t i anregime, then ru l ing the Sudan. Although i t is d if f icul t to sayprecisely what was h is formal author i ty , i t is c lear that h is defacto power over members of the confederat ion was uneven.6 A note on the his tory of the Kababish tribe inSudan Notesand Records,xlvii, 1966, an d The Kababish Arabs: Power, Authority and Consent ina Nomadic Tribe, London, Hurs t , 1970.

Political Inequality in the Kababish Tribe 129I t is a lso hard to say what was the in ternal cons t i tu t ion of theKababish t r ibes , except that some of the shaikhs appear tohave wielded autocrat ic power over their own fo l lowers , whileothers had very l i t t le , and that the groups var ied great ly inth e i r d ep en d en ce o n p as tb r a l i s m .Du r in g th e tu r b u len t y ea r s of t h e Ma h d iy a (1883-98)the confederat ion broke up af ter an in i t ia l res is tance by one or two ofthe t r ibes ( including par t of the Para mo unt Shaikh ' s t r ibe)agains t the Ma hd i . Over the years drou ght , c iv i l wa r and d iseaseimp o v e r i s h ed th e Ka b ab i s h , a s we l l a s o th e r i n h ab i t an t s o fthe Wes t , and drove mos t of them eas twards towards the Nile .I mmed ia t e ly a f te r t h e An g lo - Eg y p t i an R eco n q u es t , t h eB r i ti s h Ad min i s t r a t io n ap p o in te d 'All al-To m as Na zir (chief )o f t h e Kab a b i s h Tr ib e , wh o s e t r ad i t io n a l dar ( h o meterr i tory) was recognised to be in nor ther n Kordo fan P rov in ce . Gr ad u a l ly s ca t t e r ed r emn an t s o f man y o f t h e p r e -Ma h d iy a Ka b ab i s h t r ib e s , wh o h ad b een l iv ing a lo n g th er iv e r a in t r ac t s , r e - en te r ed n o r th e r n Ko r d o f an a n d mo v edacross in a wes ter ly d irect ion towards the remote, i l l -def inedf r o n t i e r b e tween th e An g lo - Eg y p t i an S u d an an d th e au to nomous su l tanate of Darfur . (From now on I refer to then in e teen th - cen tu r y Kab ab i s h t r ib e s a s c l an s , a l t h o u g hBri t ish of fic ia ls refer to them as sect io ns or subdivi s ions .Th e Ara bic term used local ly for the c lan isgabila, whichis the same as tha t used for t r ib e . )Uneasy rela t ions between the Br i t ish Adminis tra t ion atK h a r t o u m a n d S u l t a n 'Ali Din a r o f Dar f u r a id ed S h a ik h 'AHal-T om in h is policy of apply in g judicio us pressure aga ins tthe la t ter ' sbordersan act iv is t pol icy which s t rengthened h ispos i t ion in the eyes of h is over lords in Kh ar t oum and h is pow erin re la t ion to h is fe l low Ka bab ish . By 1916 the Darfur pol icyof Shaikh 'Ali a l -T5m converged with that of the Br i t ishAdminis tra t ion at Khar toum when a fu l l -scale mil i tary a t tackwas launched agains t 'Al i Dinar and the Sul tanate des troyed.In the two decades af ter the absorpt ion of Darfur in to theAn g lo - Eg y p t i an S u d an , t h e B r i t i s h g r ad u a l ly e l ab o r a t ed an dregular ised local adminis tra t ive pract ice . 8 In its fully-fledged

6 The most important legal stages of this process were marked by thePowerso fNomad Shaikhs Ordinance 1922, and the more inclusivePowersof ShaikhsOrdinance 1928.


7/16

130 Essays in Sudan Ethnographyform the local administrative system (known officially asNativ e Adm inis tra t i on) was a sys tem of gove rnm ent of, forand by the Na tives who were a l l (with a few except ions re la t in gma in ly to u r b an a r eas ) a r r an g ed in to t r ib e s , e ach u n d e rrepre senta t ive lead ers ( i .e . shaikhs , ch iefs, omd as) . Th epract ice of u t i l is ing Native ins t i tu t ions a t the local level foradminis tra t ive purposes was well es tabl ished in many otherBr i t ish colonies , and i t was jus t i f ied by the doctr in e tha t th epr imary concern of government is to be ef f ic ient . And s inceefficiency was to be me asu red essentia lly by financial so lvencyan d min imu m o p p o s i t io n , g o v e r n men t th r o u g h Na t iv e in s t i t u t ions (such as shaikhs , ch iefs and o md as of t r ibes ) w asreckoned to be h ighly ef f ic ient on both coun ts : i t was re la t ivelycheap and rela t ively t rouble- f ree . Thus the t r ibe with i tsau th o r i t a t iv e h i e r a r ch y b ecame n eces s a r y to th e co lo n ia lregime, as the colonial regime became necessary to thetr ibe.The formal , legal au tonomy that th is sys tem of governmentgave Shaikh 'AH, as wel l as the mandate for impos ing a pr imi t iv e b u r eau c r a t i c s t r u c tu r e , en ab led h im to co mp le t e th eprocess , begun much ear l ier , of e l iminat ing the independentpow er of the c l an shaikhs , and d is solv ing such corpo ratecha ract er as the c la ns ha d possessed . (This las t process wasalso faci l i ta ted by the fact that the Pax Br i t tan ica, and thenew pas turela nds opened up af ter 1916, a l lowed the ado ptionof a f lex ib le pas toral sys tem, with greater oppor tuni t ies forin d ep en d en t mo v emen t b y in d iv id u a l h o u s eh o ld s o r s ma l lgroups of households . ) All the impor tan t execut ive and judici a lp o s ts wi th in th e t r ib a l s t r u c tu r e wer e k ep t wi th in th e c ir c le -o f S h a ik h 'All's close relativeswhich eventual ly developedinto the pr iv i leged Awlad F ad la l l ah l i n eag e . Th e g o v e r n men t -imposed a nim al tax passed through th e hands of th is l ineage( the c l an shaikhs were f inally l i t t le more than tax-col lectors ) ,an d th e t r ad i t io n a l t r i b u te was r e t a in ed b y th em. Wh enin the ear ly 1950s an elected rural counci l was cons t i tu tedwith in the d is t r ic t , seats were a l located by tribeto theKa bab ish an d to a numb er of o ther smaller t r ibes with in thedis tr ic t . The Awlad F ad la l l ah h ad u n d i s p u ted co n t r o l o fKababish seats and were general ly a lso able to dominatedis tr ic t- level pol i t ics . Inde pen den ce in 1956 left the systemv i r tu a l ly u n to u ch ed .

Political Inequality in the Kababish Tribe 131Thus wh en I b eg an my s tu d y o f t h e Kab ab i s h t r ib ein 1961 , the to ta l real i ty b egan to ma ke sense as a s t r uctu reo f in eq u a l i ty co m p r i s in g th e Awlad F ad la l l ah r u l e r s an d th e i rsubjects , a s t ructure which I saw as involving exploitation.1 Th i sexploi ta t io n took a mat er ia l form (e .g . ex trac t ion of t r ibu te re t a in ed b y th eAwlad-Fadlallah ru lers ) , as wel l as a psychological form ( the exclus ion of the ove rwhe lmin gmajority of K a b b a -

shi householders f rom crucial ar eas in which pol i t ical decis ionsaffect ing their l i fe were taken) . The s t ructure i tse lf was thuss u mmed u p in (a) the exclus ive pol i t ical au thor i ty of theAwlad F ad la l l ah , an d (b) the a tomis t ic social organisat ionof subject Ka bba shi pas tora l is ts . In i ts essent ia ls, i t rep roduc edin min ia tu r e , an d received indispensable suppor t f rom, the' I use the word exploitat io n in both a moral and a factual sense. Mostanthropologis ts would claim, with Leach, that i f one can, one oughtto avoid such terms precisely because of their evaluative connotations.A few are prepared to make the kind of compromise that exemplifiesthe di lemm a that al l of us in anthropology face: . . . wh en used ina pejorative sense [exploitation] might be restricted to cases where thetribute was squeezed from an unwillingsubject population to maintain notonly the poli t ical eli te at an extrav agant level, but also the whole g roupfrom which they are dra wn . . . , m embers of which do not carry outpoli t ical duties . (P. C. Lloyd, Th e poli t ical s tructure of Africankingdom s in M. Banton (ed.), PoliticalSystems an dthe Distributiono f

Power, London, Tavi stock (A.S .A. M onograph 2) , 1965,p. 78). Apartfrom the awkward question of deciding what is an extrav agant level ,the whole posit ion comes dangerously close to the dubious principlethat our mora l concern may be act ivated only when huma n beings voicea vigorous protest against subjection. We do not avoid taking a moralat t i tude if we use a so-called neu tral word, we s imply insis t on ou rprivi lege of remaining un involved, and on our option of bringing in thelabels g ood or ba d from a private box of ethical s tandardswhenever we choose, i have used the word exploitat io n to describethe Kababish s tructure for reasons that I hope wil l emerge in the nextsection. It will be seen that these reasons have nothing to do with toomu ch as against only a l i t t le , or with unwill ingness and prot est .(For an interesting discussion of the ideological roots of the principleof ethical neutrality in social science see A. W.Gouldner, Ant i -Minotau r: the my th of a value-free sociology in I. L. Horo witz, (e d.),The New Sociology, New York, Oxford University Press, 1965.For a moregeneral work on the historical transformations of the fact/value relationship, see A. Maclntyre's admi rable A Short History of Ethics, London,Routledge and Kegan Paul , 1967.)


8/16

132 Essays in Sudan Ethnographylarger structure of inequality which had held together theentire colonial Sudan.Seen in historical perspective the objective formation ofa Kab abish trib e represents the emergence and crystallisation of a determinate pattern of inequality between theprivileged chief's family and their subjects, established by'Ali al-Tom under the aegis of a colonial government (whichwas concerned with particular problems of consolidating andadministering the Sudan as a whole, and of implementing ordeveloping international policies in the colonial Africancontext), and continued under various nationalist governmentsfrom 1956 to 1969. In conceptual terms our concern iswith a particu lar ideological category, the trib e , whichserved British officials with a concept for rationalising (in bothsenses, Weberian and Freudian) a host of administrativedecisions and actions on a pan-Sudanic scale, which theyalone were taking, as decisions and actions concerned withthe identity and welfare of an unambiguous entity held to bepart of a widespread and interlinked system of similarentities throughout the rural Sudan. At this level it wasa concept born of the colonial encounter, which at oncerepresented regular administrative practice, and obscured realpolitical contradictions. For the structure of tribal administration enab led the ruling B ritish elite to deny any representativecharacter to the t roublesome urban nat ional ist ,8 while claiming for itself just th at on the g rounds th at it remained theessential co-ordinator of the system of Native Administration,which held together and represented most of the real Sudan.Thus the t r ibe and the t r ibal system from being a meansof efficient adm inistr ation b ecam e the justification for perpetuating colonial domination.

For example when the Graduates ' General Congress (a proto-politicalparty of non-sectarian, urb an nationalis ts) pu t forward a num ber ofimportant demands to the colonial government in 1942, they wereviolently rebuffed. Th e real reason , according to a Bri tish ex-Adminis trator, ha d nothing to do with their demand s. It lay in their claimto represent the whole country, which Government could not admit ,as i t repeatedly emphasized. K. D. D. Henderson, Sudan Republic,London, Benn, 1965, p. 80.

Political Inequality in theKababish TribeI I I

33

Let us look a little more closely at this entity, apparentlydesignated by such terms as the Kababish , the Kababishtrib e , and (in Arabic) gabilat al-kababish , in its lo calcontext.Roughly speaking the Awlad Fadlallah shaikhs and theirsubjects share a common culture (mode of life, material artefacts, technology, language, religion, etc.). But so too do theKababish and the neighbour ing p astoral populations (e.g.Hawawir , Kawahla) . More important in the context of thepresent discussion, therefore, is the fact that the AwladFadlallah shaikhs and their subjects are distinguished fromone another by separate (and even contradictory) experiencesof political life. These differences are represented in andobscured by the expression the Kaba bish tribe as used bygovernment administrators, the anthropologist, and AwladFadlallah shaikhs (in the Arabic equivalent gab ilat al-kaba-bish or simply al -kaba bish ) . In what way are theseseparate experiences significant in the lives of the peopleconcerned? Or , to put i t another way, what separates theKabbashi populat ion, and what br ings them together asa t r ibe ?Take means of existence: among the pastoral Kababishlivestock is owned by individuals and managed by households,while grazing and water-points are collectively-owned resources. The collective process of production among Kabbashipastoralists makes available a surplus which is partly appropriated by the Awlad Fadlallah rulers. In other words, theelite does not contribute uniquely to the collective process ofproduction, i .e. to the basic means of existence, but it doesappropriate a privileged portion of the collective surplus.Yet does the elite not do something correspondingly uniqueand indispensable to the basic conditions of collectiveexistencei.e. secure social ord er ? Or de r for some functionalists refers to a normative system which it seems maybe compatible with a state of almost continuous violence (asamong the Nuer): it is clear that such normative order doesnot depend upon a rul ing el i te. But does not the Kabbashielite secure order in a more positive sense also, i .e. byhelping on a consensual basis to underwrite a relatively


9/16

134 Essays in Sudan Ethnographypeaceful acceptance of social norms and customs (in local lawcourts, etc.), and by representing the collective interest?9 Inthis connection two points are worth making: first,so do mostordinary Kabbashis, for custom as the norm of everyday lifeis largely underwritten in the practice of everyday life withits own (re lati vely peaceful) system of reci procal pressuresand moral orientations. I have shown in my detailed accountof the ordinary Kabbashi pastoralist's mode of life, that he hasneither the material nor the moral means to establish permanent exploitative relations with people outside his household,and still less to constitute a permanent threat to their collectiveexistence.10 I must stress this again, because the argument

9 This is the classic Hobbesian formulation of the problem of socialorder. Hobbes, it may be recalled, argued the need for an absolutesovereign (individual or group) to represent the collective interestby ensuring the basic conditions in which a desirable social life couldbe l ived. But he a rgued tha t the sovereign's position to be effectiverequired amonopoly ofauthority ra ther than amonopoly of orce.It isas absolute ump irenotas absolute tyrant t hat H obbes sees the sovereignperforming hisessential function . H ence it is not surpris ing that thedominanceof thesovereign isrepresented as being based on consent,regardless of whether he acquires his position by conquest or bycont rac t (i.e .forcean dconsentare notcontraries).But as G. B. Mac-pherson has shownin hisbri l l iant s tudy Th ePolitical Theoryof PossessiveIndividualism(Oxford, 1962),Hobbes 's theory wasanattempt to describeand resolvet hepoli t ical di lemm asofan emerging m arket society, withits pervasive values of aggressive, acquisitive individualism and itsunequal dis tribution ofproper ty . It isgiven this background tha t thefunction of a sovereign becomes essential,forwi thouthim the desirablesocial life, ascomm ercial , propert ied England wascoming to conceiveand liveit ,would indeedbeimpossible. The only importan t factor thatHobbes 's theory appears to have overlooked is the existence of classinterest and class cohesion, a factor which made it both unreasonableand uncongenial , from thepoint ofviewof the propertied classes, toaccept the indispensabil ityofanabsolutesovereign. Hencet heperennialpreoccupation of English l iberal poli t ical theory with consti tut ionalchecks and balances , thecondit ions oftrue consent ,thebases of representat ion, etc. Isitentirely fortuitous,o rwithout material consequence,that Western anthropologis ts hav e been so readytoconceptualise s tructures of poli t ical domination in all kinds of non- capitalist societieswithin the terms of a Hobbesian world?10 The Kababish Arabs. Kabbashi individualism doesn ottake theformofa hypersensitive concernfor personal honouror of an unlimited desire

Political Inequality in the Kababish Tribe 135that the need to secure a relatively peaceful acceptance ofsocial norms is a sufficient sociologicalreason for the tri balelit e's polit ical privilege (regardless of its historical origins),rests on certain far-reaching assumptions about huma n natu reand society. In particular, it rests on the assumption thatsince aggressiveness and acquisitiveness are innate humancharacteristics, and material scarcity a universal social condition, the population of any given society must be controlledby a governing elite according to generally agreed rules if itis not to fall into a conditi on of violent anarchy. 11 Second:the altern ative to the function of mainta ini ng a given system of social norms and moral values is not necessarilychaos but a radi call y different system. This last poin tmay be seen concretely in the fact that the underwriting ofsocial norms was carried out just as.effectively during theearly years of this century, before Shaikh 'AH consolidated

for accumulating possessions, but ra ther of the drive to attain self-sufficiency.11 Hence the identification ofsocial controlby so many anthropologis tsasthecentral poli t ical problem.Fo rexampleJ. Beattie opensthechapterenti t led Social Contr ol: Poli t ical Orga nizatio n inOther Cultureswiththe fol lowing sentences: Th ere couldbe no coherent social life unlessthe social relat ionships which bind people together were atleasttosomedegree orderly, institutionalized and predictable. The only al ternativeto order is chaos. To mainta in an orderly system of social relationspeople havetobe subjected tosome degree of compu lsion; they ca nnot,al l the t ime, do as they l ike. Thu s in every society some sort ofinternal order issecured on a tribal or terri tory-wide basis , externalrelations areprovidedfor, anddecisionsin regard tothese mattersaretaken in accordance withgenerally accepted rules. The polit ical problemis how,-in a society being studied, these things are brought a bout .Ibid.,p. 143. Hence the position of a governing el i te which upholdsa system ofnorms and values relatively peacefully may beviewed asbeing based on consent . This consensual element, seen sometimes asvestedin the sovereign, sometimesin thenormsandvalues ,is a themeechoed or explicitly developed by innumerable anthropologis ts :P. G.Lloyd, Swartz, Turner andT u d e n ,F. G.Bailey,and G.Balandiertomention onlya few recent writers. Like Beattie, none ofthese writersis prepared to consider whether a poli t ical anthropology which basesitself on certain assumptions about the na ture of man need m akeany intel lectual contact with psychological anthropology or developits own comparative social psychology.


10/16

136 Essays in Sudan Ethnography Political Inequality in theKababish Tribe 137undisputed power for h imself and h is family , as after. A n dthere is no reason to ins is t that i f the paternal is t s t ructure ofth is par t of the Sudan were to be ef fect ively d ismantled thep o p u la t io n wo u ld immed ia t e ly l ap s e in to n o r mles s n es s . Th i spoint is perh aps a lmos t p la t i tu dinou s in i ts present formu lat ionbut i t should serve to ra ise the ques t ion wh at then does thepol i t ical e l i te real ly do? Wh at are the a l ternat iv es to wh at i td o e s ?Th ere is one fur ther arg um ent con cernin g the ru l ing el i te ' sindispensable funct ion , namely that they represent the t r ibeas a col lect iv i ty in re la t ions with outsidersother tr ibes , theg o v e r n men t , e t c . I n r ecen t an th r o p o lo g ica l l i t e r a tu r e th i sk ind of represe ntat ive funct ion has been analysed with the a idof expl ic i t econom ic image ry , in which the chief or ru l inggroup has been seen as an indispensable entrepreneur orm i d d l e - m a n .12 S u ch m ar k e t im ag e r y d o es h av e s o me r e l ev an ce12 See, for example, F. Barth's lucid discussion of the representativefunction of the Basseri chief: Perha ps the chief 's most importantfunction is to represent the tribe in i ts relations with the I ranian adminis trat ion, and in confl icts with sedentary communit ies of persons. . .Where persons or groups belonging to such different parts of a pluralsociety meet , there must be mechanisms mediat ing the relat ionshipbetween themwithin the limitedsituation of theirinteraction, they must be'comparable' insome appropriate framework. Usually. . . this s i tuat ion is themarket place, where people meet as buyers and sel lers , producers andconsumers , and are equally subject to the ' terms of trade' regardlessof the differences in their backgrounds. . . In the relat ions betweengroups of tribesmen and the organs of government, or where confl ictsbetween a nom ad an d a sedentary are m ade the subject of judicialprocedure, however, the s i tuation is far more complex , al though s t i l lbased on the market mod el . . . A workable mechanism can only beachieved by channell ing such confl icts through adminis trat ive supers t ructures which b r idge . . . difference(s) by transforming the interests

and the social units concerned to a point where they become comparable and thus able to communicate. (Nomads of SouthPersia, Oslo,1961, pp. 77-9.) The market model , which has been applied with greatingenuity by recent anthropologis ts to exotic poli tics , is not onlycompatible with the Hobbesian model, but an elaboration ofit : withinthe tribe the sovereign (as umpire) is necessary to orderly social lifebecause he can regulate relat ions in condit ions which tend to resembleimperfect compe ti t ion; as between tribes the sovereign (as middleman)is necessary to orderly social life because he can transform particularinterests and units into general exchange values in condit ions which

in the Ka bab ish s i tua t ion , a l th ough i t is l ikely to obscure asmuch as i t reveals . The pol i t ical e l i te may indeed act in thecap ac i ty o f en t r ep r en eu r , m id d le man o r r ep r e s en ta t iv e , b u ti t does so as a middleman who has a pr iv i leged monopoly inrela t io n to h is t r iba l c l ie n ts . As with a l l holders of crucialmo n o p o l i e s th i s g iv es th e e l i t e - mid d leman d o min an t p o werover o thers : the middleman is ab le to def ine the condit ionsfor the fulfillment of his clients ' interests , and even to determine their essent ia l pr ior i t ies . And as with a l l ef fect ive casesof crucial monop olies , argu me nts jus t i fy ing the exis t inga r r an g e men t in t e r ms o f r eq u i r emen t s o f t h e ma r k e t , o r o f t h ecl ients ' in teres ts , are not wanting , but there is no a pr ior ireason why the anthropologis t should regard h imself boundto accept such arguments a t their face value. Alternat ives doexis t , and in the case of the Kabbashi pol i t ical e l i te ' s representat ive funct ion , the a l ternat ive is any ar rangement whichgives the ordinary Kabbashi greater choice over the pol i t icaldecisions affecting his life than he has at present.

Mu ch mo r e imp o r t an t t h an i t s ma in te n an ce o f t h e so c ialnorms and social welfare of the Kabbashi populat ion or i tsrepresentat ive ro le is another funct ion of the pol i t ical e l i teth e p e r p e tu a t io n o f a p a r t i cu la r s t r u c tu r e o f i n eq u a l i ty whichis part of itsdefinition of the Kababish tribe . This is the essent ia lmo d e in wh ich th e Kab b a s h i p o p u la t io n i s b r o u g h t t o g e th e r .An d in order to car ry out th is funct ion ef fect ively , the ru le rsmus t impose a d is t inct ive ideological order on their exper ienceof pol i t ical l i fe . They mus t convince not only their subjects bu talso themselves of the legi t imacy of their d is t inct ive pos i t ionand pr iv i lege, and in seeking to meet th is need they set themselves ideological ly apa r t f rom those of the Ka bab ish t r ib ewh o a r e d o min a ted b y th em. Th ey p e r ce iv e th e p o l i t i c a ls t ructure in character is t ic fashion , jus t i fy ing i t and descr ib ingi ts real i ty in ways that are not those of the non-el i te . Thenon-el i te for their par t mus t make sense of the real i ty of theirs u b o r d in a t io n . 1 3

tend to resemble perfect com peti t ioni.e. condit ions in which(theoretical) equals meet , and the market regulates itself. In neithermodel are conflict and struggle seen as precluded by the presence ofconsent.In this differential conceptualisation and justification of the politicalorder we find another reason for questioning the use of a consensual


11/16

i 3 8 Essays in Sudan Ethnography Political Inequality in theKababish Tribe 139Although their percept ions d if fer , both e l i te and non-el i teaccept the pol i t ical s t ructure , with i ts pr iv i lege and i ts exclus ion , as legitimatei. e . as par t of a jus t a nd na tur al socialo r d e r . Hen c e we mu s t sp eak o f t h e p o l i t i c a l au th o r i ty an dn o t mer e ly th e p o l i t i c a l d o m in an ce o f t h e e li t e . As I pointed-out in my book, i t is nei ther phys ical force, nor consent thatco n s t i tu t e s th e p r ima r y co n d i t io n o fAwlad Fadlal lah pol i t ical

author i ty , but ra ther the complex h is tor ical real i ty of leg i t i ma te s t r u c tu r a l ex c lu s io n .Broadly speaking the Awlad Fadlal lah ru lers tend to th inkin terms of the author i ty of norms , and their subjects in termsof the autho r i ty of persons . In their conceptual isa t ion of thetr ibe , the e l i te tend to s t ress homogenei ty , uni ty , consensus .In conversat ions with outs iders they of ten represen t theKa b ab i s h a s a k in d o f co l lec t ive personalitywhence theira s s e rt io n th a t Th e Kab ab i s h s t an d a s o n e m an . Th u s th eypresent their sect ional in teres ts in universal is t categor ies .I n l eg i t ima t in g th e i r p o l i t i c a l d o min an ce an d p r iv i l eg e a sauthority, they app eal to the legal i ty der ived f rom ce ntralgovernment f ia ts and h is tor ical cont inui ty , and to the needfor perform ing essent ia l adm inis tra t ive tasks with in thet r ib e ( k eep in g l aw an d o r d e r , j u d g in g d i s p u te s , co l lec t in gtaxes , managing the essent ia l bus iness of the Rural Counci l) ,which they feel they are bet ter equipped to car ry out thanth e non-Awlad-Fadlallah t r ib es men . Th e o r d in a r y Ka b b as h ipas toral is t ' s v iew is par t ly of a heterogeneous col lect ion ofcla ns (each of whic h is seen as a homoge neous ca tegory ofkinsmenthose who have the same or ig in , the same clanname, and therefore in some measure the same ident i ty) andpar t ly of in ter l in ked gro ups of pol i t ical ly equa l household s .I t is therefore in terms of k inship ideology that the ordinaryKabbashi seeks to represent household in teres t in re la t ion tohis pol i t ical peers . I t is rarely i f ever that he has occas ion tos p eak in t e r ms of t h e Ka b ab i s h t r ib e . 1 4 If he speaks of

framework for understanding the relat ions between Kabbashi rulersand their subjects,w In myfieldwork I was at first constantly frustrated by the answers thatordinary Kabbashi informants gave to my detai led enquiries aboutKab abish custo ms : People are not all the sam e. . . they Wouldbegin. Awlad Fadlal lah informants , on the other hand, were far moreready to general ise abou t Kab abish custom s .

h ims e l f a s Ka b a b i s h wh en co n fr o n ted wi th , f or ex amp le ,a non-Arab Meidobi t r ibesman, i t is to refer to par t of h isconcrete indiv idual i ty , and to h is address , which is summedu p b y th e ca t eg o r y Ka b ab i s h . I n re l a t io n to th e s u p e r io rpos i t ion of the Aw lad Fad lal la h he sees h imself subo rdina tedby an indiv idua l condit ion of power lessness . Super io r pol i t icalpower is ipso facto l eg i t ima te p o wer ( au th o r i ty ) b ecau s e i t sexercise is seen as reason able a nd jus t . This s ta tem ent ma yap p ea r t au to lo g ica l , b u t I h av e a t t emp ted in my b o o k tospel l out the terms of th is tau to logy which saves i t , I hope,f rom being completely vacuous . I have there t r ied to descr ibethe social c i rcumstances which help to g ive subs tance toKab b as h i n o t io n s o f r ea s o n ab len es s an d ju s t i ce , an d to s h o whow exis t ing socio-economic condit ions permit the averageKab b as h i p as to r a l i s t t o p u r s u e h i s n o r ma l a s p i r a t io n s wi th inthe present s t ructure of pol i t ical inequal i ty .

I VPoli t ical ideology refers to an express ion of the exper iencetha t is formed in the process of adjus t ing to , or shapi ng, or ins o me o th e r way r e s p o n d in g to p o l i t i c a l r ea l i t y . I t co n ce p tu a l ises pol i t ical real i ty , as wel l as being par t of i t . But the concept ion of pol i t ical real i ty that an ideology contains is par t lya d is tor t ion beca use i t is inevi ta bly inf luenced by the fact thatpeople have to adjus t to c ircumstances , to hope for a l ternat ives , and to jus t i fy their hop e or their ad jus t men t .I have sugges ted above that the ru lers ' concept ion of thepol i t ical s t ru cture is ideological n ot only because i t is anexpress ion of social real i ty perce ived, exper ie nced a nd l ivedout , but a lso because i t is a par t ia l , obscure and d is tor tedacco u n t o f t h a t r ea l i t y . B u t t h e o r d in a r y Kab b as h i ' s co n cept ion of the pol i t ical s t ructure is in i ts own way no lessideological . In my book I was able to analyse the ideologicalch a r ac t e r o f t h e Awlad F ad la l l ah co n cep t io n s o f au th o r i tyb ecau s e I ad o p te d th e co n t r ad ic to r y p e r s p ec t iv e of t h e o r d in ary K abb ash i subject based on h is d is t inct ive mo de of l ife andwork. But I d id not go beyond th is poin t in my analys is (asI s h o u ld h av e d o n e ) b y ex amin in g th e id eo lo g ica l co mp o n en t sin the subject ' s own concept ions f rom the contradictory


12/16

140 Essays in Sudan Ethnographyperspective of the Awlad Fadlallah shaikhs after this perspective had itself been criticised. Thus my analysis of theKabbashi subject 's ideology, because it was essentially uncritical, remained incomplete and somewhat misleadinginfact it was little more than arestatement of that ideology.Wh en I returne d briefly to the Sudan in July 197015 inorder to collect data for a more dev eloped analysis of Kab bash ipolitical ideologies than the one I had been able to providein my book, I encountered certain practical difficulties in thefield: first, exceptionally heavy rains at a time when mostKabbashi pastoralists were themselves on the move madephysical communication a complicated matter; secondly,potentially far-reaching political changes were beginning tobe initiated by the central governm ent, which ma de itimpossible for me to question adequately those members ofth eAwlad Fadlallah I was able to contact, concerning theirviews on the political structure of the trib e . I did, however,have a number of discussions on this subject with ordinaryKababish, which served to clarify some aspects of their ideology, and hence some of the conditions that had made thepattern of inequality the viable structure that it was.I give a few extracts from one such conversation I rec orded.In connection with a particular incident involving a thirdparty known to both of us, I asked my informant about therole of the sectionshaikhofwhom there a re generally severalto one 'clan', and who are the historical successors to theautonomous tribal shaikhs of the nineteenth century Kababishconfederation.

T he shaikh fara' (section shaikh) has certain administrativeduties but in the event of some injustice we go straight tothe big shaikhs (Awlad Fadlallah). When he comes beforethe Nazir or the big shaikhs the shaikh fara1 is just anordinary Arab. He has no sulfa (auth or i ty) . . . Or we gostraight to the Rural Council officethe hakuma(government) hassulta.(If the hakuma commits an injustice against you, willyou accept it quietly?)16 I am grateful to the Social Science Research Council for the grant

that enabled me to make this vis i t .

Political Inequalityin the Kababish Tribe 141What can we do? Are we above the hakuma? Thehakuma is the hakuma and we are like cattle. From thet ime that God created ma n there has always been h akuma .In the old days, they say, the haku ma used to cut off people'sheads and destroy them. People could only run away intothe wilderness or jump into the river like fish in order toescape. Is there any other way?Our complaint is against the merchantsthey raise theprices of everything we b uy, so that ifwesell them animalsand buy goods from them we come away with nothing inour h ands . By God they are so clever, they can even deceivethe hakuma. If anyone comes by lorry from the towns theysell to him at the fixed price, but to the Arabs they selldear. They sell us tea at 30 and 35 (piastres per pound),and last year it cost 20 and 2 1. By God this hakum a hashelped us more than anything because it has fixed theprices of many things which were not fixed before. But themerchants are clever. They oppress us. They have nosulta

but they have the benefit of the pen which gives them a wayto the hakuma.The Nazirs and the big shaikhs do nothing for us. Theyought to help us.(Why do you say that? How can they help you?)They ought to go to the hakum a and say Fix such andsuch a price for the Arabs who are oppressed by the merchants . For after all , do the Nazirs and the big shaikhs notbenefit from us (lit. eat from us)? When a king comes ora guest of the hakuma, is it not from us that the Nazirs andthe big shaikhs collect the animals and the gifts? Thehospitality that they give is all from the Arabs. Is it notright that they should help us against the merchants? Butthey don't care. They leave us and the merchants toourselves.

A few points are already apparent from these brief extracts.The hakuma is seen as all-powerful and as part of the naturalorder ofthingsbeing all-powerful it is perhaps not subjectto moral approval or disapproval (which is not to say thatit does not have a moral aspect). My informant's reference to


13/16

142 Essays in Sudan Ethnographyth e hakuma d u r in g wh a t I t ak e to b e th e Mah d iy a , t h o u g hs ca r ce ly co mp l imen ta r y , was mad e n o t a s a c r i t i c i s m o f th egross in jus t ice of tha t hak um a, bu t ra th er as an ins tance of i tsa l l -powerfulness . This does not mean, of course , that whenth e o ccas io n came , t h e o r d in a r y Kab b as h i wo u ld b e in cap ab leo f co n ce iv in g o f h ak u ma in t e r ms o th e r t h an l imi t l e s s p o wer .I t i s mer e ly th a t u n d e r p r e s en t c i r cu ms tan ces th e h a k u m aap p ea r s to th e o r d in a r y Kab b as h i a s a k in d o fdeusex machina.I t seems to impinge on h is l i fe only indirect ly , impersonal lya n d arbitrarilymainly th r o u g h th e au th o r i ty o f t h e Naz i ran d th e b ig s h a ik h s , an d th r o u g h th e p r o b lem o f mer ch an t sand r is ing pr ices .

Th u s an o th e r e l emen t in th e Kab b as h i s u b jec t ' s p e r cep t io nof the pol i t ical s t ructure is the sulta of the Nazir and the b igs h a ik h s , an d th e h o mo g en eo u s s u b o r d in a t io n o f a l l n o n -Aw lad - F a d la l l ah . He d o es n o t s ee a p y r am id o f g r ad ed o ff ice swh ich emb r aces th e wh o le t r ib e , b u t a d i ch o to mo u s s t r u c tu r eo f a g r o u p wi th p o wer an d au th o r i ty an d a g r o u p wi th o u t .This is how th ings are and th is is how they should be, forth e r e i s n o a t t em p t to q u es t io n th i s i n eg a l i t a r i an s t r u c tu r ein an y f u n d amen ta l way . On th e co n t r a r y , s u ch c r i t i c i s m o fthe Na zir a nd th e b ig shaikhs as ther e is depe nds for i ts forceprecisely on a pos i t ive acceptance of th is inequal i ty . My informant d id not cr i t ic ise the t r ibal ru lers for tak ing animalsand t r ibute f rom their subjects , but for not car ry ing out theirmoral duty as ru lers who owe their subjects something inr e tu r n f or , wh a t t h ey t ak e . Th e r u l e r s a r e b l am ed f o r t h e i rin ac t io n in r e l a t io n to th e mer ch an t s , an d th e r e i s t h e r e f o r es o me co n cep t io n o f a j u s t an d ad eq u a te g r o u p o f r u l e r s wh ichd o es n o t co in c id e ex ac t ly wi th th e way in wh ich to d ay ' s r ea lru lers are sometimes seen to act . Thus in th is par t of the v iewo f p o l i t i c a l st r u c tu r e en te r t a in ed b y th e Kab b as h i s u b jec tthings as they are a n d things as they should be are d is t inguishe din a way that they are not in the par t that re la tes to theh a k u m a .

A th i r d e l emen t in th e Kab b as h i s u b jec t ' s p e r cep t io n o f t h epol i t ical s t ructure is the merchant , who is seen as exercis ingd o min an t p o wer o v e r th e o r d in a r y t r ib e s man , b u t a p o werth a t i s r e s en ted ev en th o u g h i t i s s u b mi t t ed to . Th e mer c h an tmay not commit any expl ic i t legal of fence, but he is seen asus ing h is power exploi ta t ively . In fact no clearcut d is t inct ion

Political Inequality in the Kababish Tribe 143i s mad e b e tween th e me r ch an t ' s d o min an t p o w er a s s u ch ( h i sman ip u la t io n o f t h e co mm o d i ty ma r k e t f or p e r s o n a l p r o f i t)an d h i s u n ju s t u s e o f t h a t p o wer . Th e Ka b b as h i p as to r a l is ts ee s th e mer ch an t ' s d o m in an t p o wer ( r ig h t ly ) a s mar k e tpower , which he resents , perhaps because of a vague feel ingtha t i t conf l icts with th e not ion of jus t pr ices (pr ices tha t d onot increase?) At any rate , one may see that i t is because themer ch an t s d o n o t h av e sulta th a t t h e i r d o min an t p o wer i sresentedthe reverse is not t rue, for Awlad F ad la l l ah b e h av io u r may b e r e s en ted wi th o u t an y q u es t io n in g o f t h e i rsulta. H e n c e sulta is a leg i t imation of dominance re la t ionshipswh ich r ep r e s en t s mu ch mo r e th an a practical acquiescence ind o min an t p o wer . F o r a l th o u g h th e mer ch an t ' s exercise ind o m in an t c o mm er c ia l p o wer i s accep ted ( i t i s n o t y e t p e r vas ive) , i t is , as coercion, seen as an incongruous in trus ion in toa ju s t an d n a tu r a l wo r ld .One of the mos t impor tant ideological features of the textq u o ted ab o v e i s t h e s h a r p d i s t in c t io n mad e b e tween th eh ak u ma an d th e s h a ik h s . No t o n ly a r e d i f f e r en t mo r a l a t t i t u d es ad o p ted in r e l a t io n to th e h ak u ma an d th e s h a ik h s , b u tthe two also seem to cons t i tu te d if ferent k inds of exis tent ia lcategory . One obvious aspect of th is is the personal , regular ,ant ic ipate d chara cter of shaikhly pol i t ical act iv i ty , someth ingthat the hakuma lacks : i t is poss ib le that the wil l ingness top as s mo r a l j u d g em en t o n th e f o r mer b u t n o t o n th e l a t t e r i sconnected with th is d if ference. Yet in real i ty the AwladF ad la l l ah s h a ik h s a r e an ex ten s io n o f t h e h ak u ma ( cen t r a lg o v e r n m en t ) , i n th e s h ap e o f t h e Na t iv e Ad m in i s t r a t io nS y s tem an d a s co n s t i t u t ed memb er s o f t h e R u r a l Di s t r i c tC o u n c i l . Of co u r s e , t h ey h av e co n s id e r ab le au to n o my an dini t ia t ive, but a lways an indispensable measure of theird o m in an t p o w er is d e r iv ed f ro m th e cen t r a l g o v e r n m en t ,first colonial and then nat ional is t . The shaikhly ru lers seeth is qui te c lear ly , but their subjects do not . I t is in a par t ia l ,d is tor ted sense that the subjects see th is connect ion: for themth e Awlad F ad la l l ah s h a ik h a s hakim ( ru ler ) shares in thatqual i ty of a l l -powerfulness that is a pr imary def in ing character is t ic of the hakuma. But in th is ideological form theconnect ion works only one wayit helps to re-enforce thelegi t im acy that is c la im ed by the Awlad Fadlal lah shaikhs assomething due to a l l ru lers (who mus t , as ru lers , a t leas t


14/16

144 Essays inSudan Ethnographypossess the visible signs of dominant power). It does notprovoke the question of how the central government (what itstands for, what it achieves and how it relates to the Kababishtribe ) is to be evaluated through its tribal extension; or theequally important question of how relevant the structure oftribal authority is to certain practical problems which theordinaryKabbashi recognises (easier watering, more medicaland veterinary attention, improved grazing, reaso nableprices for goods bought a nd animals sold) and which can on lybe resolved at thepan-Sudanic level. It leads him to exaggerate the power of the tribal elite, and to see his particularpredicam ent en tirely in relation to this elite rather tha n to theh a k u m a , within a structured political reality whose foundations were laid in the colonial epoch.Thus the ideological pattern that links together in a specificway hakuma, Awlad Fadlallah shaikhs and Kabbashipastoralists, is not simply an ideational structure (which hasa mainly logical relationship to society), or simply a set ofsocial norms (which has a mainly instrumental value in socialsituations), but primarily a form of consciousness which hasa determinate yet dynamic connection with socio-economicconditions, and which contributes towards the maintenanceof the objective structure of political inequality in this part ofthe Sudan.

VIf the ideological positions of Kabbashi subjects and theirrulers are different (as I have suggested) an d even to someextent contradictory, why do they not come into directconflict? The brief answer to the question is that up to thepresent, socio-economic conditions have permitted them toremain not incompatible.16 It m ight have been apposite at this16 When anthropologis ts have been aware of the existence of contradictoryideologies, it is generally in relation to revolution ary situations (e.g.L. de Heusch, My the et societe feodale , Archives deSociologie desReligions,xviii, 1964). This is the po int at wh ich ideologies beco merelat ively art iculate and coheren t , when they emerge from the concretelevels of sense-certainty and perception to the abstract levels of unders tanding and theory, the point at which contradict ions between ideological positions become by definition explicit and explosive. But there

Political Inequality inthe Kababish Tribe 145point to attem pt a sketch of the socio-economic circumstanceswhich would be likely to bring out into the ope n a d irect clashbetween the ideological position of the Kabbashi pastoralistsand that of their shaikhly rulers, had it not been for the factthat certain political developments em anating from the capitalmake such a discussion redundant.The revolutionary, military regime that came to powerin 1969 has now (1970) abolished the Native AdministrationSystem, and the elected Rural District Councilin this asin all other areas of the Sudan. For the moment the businessof the district as a whole is carried out by c entral go vernme ntadministrators (Inspector, Executive Officer) together withother civil servants (local Medical Officer, Veterinary Officer,Education Officer, etc.). The Awlad Fadlallah shaikhs stillfunction as tax officials, but section shaikhs who do the actualwork are being increasingly encouraged to bypass them anddeliver directly to the executive headquarters at Sodiri. Moreimportant ,AwladFad lallah shaikhs continue to work as localcourt judges (court presidents), but the central g overnme nthas plans to replace them soon by trained judges who aregazetted civil servants.All of this points to the probability that the tribe willdissolve into the district in a way that was not possiblebefore. If, when this happe ns, tribalism of the kind thathas been reported and analysed for West and Central Africawere to emerge he re, it would of course be a very differentideological phenom enon from the one represented by thetribe with its authoritative structure of cohesive, privilegedshaikhs ruling in the name of the Ka bab ish . Now that theNative Administration system has been repudiated and is tobe progressively dismantled, one ideological element encapsulated in the concept of the Kababis h tribe shouldbecome more evident to the ordinary Kabbashi pastoralists,for nothing will now stand between them and the hakuma toobscure the latter 's true character. One hopes that thisdevelopment will make them more aware than was possible

is no reason to assume, as many anthropologists do, that in times ofs tabil i ty a s ingle ideological order prevailsor even more s trongly,that stability is dependent on the prevalence of a single ideology (see,e.g., P. C. Lloyd,o p.cit.).


15/16

146 EssaysinSudan Ethnographybefore ,of the way in wh ich th e i r d e s t in y is affected by d ec i s ions taken (or not t ak en ) at the p an - S u d an ic l ev e l . Andp e r h a p s it wil l a lso reveal to t h e m t h a t the hakuma is notas a l l -powerful as it o n ce ap p ea r ed to be.

V II will no t ins is t that my analys is of the Kab b a s h i s u b jec t' sideology isco r r ec t in all respects, s till less that it is co mp le te .A fu l ler analys is would reveal the ideology to be far r ichera n d far mo r e co n t r ad ic to r y , wi th in i t s e l f and in r e l a t io n tod ev e lo p in g s o c io - eco n o mic c i r cu ms tan ces , t h an I have beenab le to d emo n s t r a t e h e r e . But I th in k I have said enough tom a k e the m a i n p o i n t in my p a p e r a l i t t l e c l ea r e r : we can n o tu n d e r s t an d h i s to r i ca l s t r u c tu r e s ofpol i t ical dom inat io n unlesswe a l s o u n d e r t ak e a cr i t ical inves t igat ion of ideologies ino r d e r to u n c o v e r the p a r t i a l , d i s to r t ed co n cep t io n s of real i tyb u i l t i n to th em, an d which being thus bui l t , cons t i tu te ani n d i s p en s ab le p a r t of such s tructures . And in so far as suchcr i t ical inves t igat ions are also a k in d of ch a l l en g e to claimsa b o u t the t r u e n a tu r e of mo r a l /p o l i t i c a l r ea l i t y , the u n d e r s t an d in goffacts gained mu s t bea l lo wed to in t e r ac t r a t io n a l lyw i t h the m o r a l and pol i t ical assumptions of the inves t igatorhimself. '

I t wil l be seen that th is k ind of analys is has b een p u r s u edfo r at leas t a h u n d r ed y ea r s in theco n tex t of th eo r y wh ich isa imed p r imar i ly at u n d e r s t a n d i n g European i.e. Western)poli t ical exper ience. In the co n tex t of theor ies con cernedmain ly wi th n o n - E u r o p e an , ex o t i c p o l i ti c s , h o wev e r , t h i sa p p r o a c h is s t i l l very rare . In mos t cases the t e r m id eo lo g yi s h an d le d byan th r o p o lo g i s t si n an o n - c r i t i ca l way, toin d ica t e(i) a setof moral ideals f rom wh ich (menb e in g wh a t t h eyare)actual conduct fa l ls shor t ;or (ii) a set ofm o r e or lessarticulatebel iefs (myth , theory) which has a ce r t a in fit inr e l a t io n tosocial s t ructure (symbolisesi t,reflects it , adjus ts to i t) ; or (iii)a set of public ly ac cepted ru les of b eh av io u r wh ich are suff ic ient ly ambiguous or flexible to al low the indiv idu al ' tom a n i p u l a t e t h e m to his ad v an tag e ( h en ce , the essentialr a t i o n a l i t y of all men is v in d ica t ed ) . Al th o u g h s u ch co n ceptual isat io ns of ideology have y ielded ins ights in to t he n a tu r e

Political Inequalityin theKababish Tribe 147of political real i ty , they are all essent ia l ly non-cr i t ical , andbased d irect ly on thep r in c ip l e of the s tr ic t separat ion of factan d v a lu e .1 7C er ta in ly the sys tematic theoret ical e labo rat ion of acriticalap p r o ach wo u ld in v o lv e the Wes te r n an th r o p o lo g i s t in diffi cu l t an d d i s tu r b in g q u es t io n s , i n c lu d in g the ideologicalimp l i ca t io n s ofh iso wncul tu ral pos i t ion from wh ich hisviewso f t r ib a l , n o n - E u r o p ea n s oc ie ti e s are d r a w n . He wouldh a v e toco n s id e r wh e th e r , to wh a t ex ten tand why these viewsten d to represent such societ ies bas ical ly in the i m a g e ofEu r o p ean h i s to r i ca l ex p e r i en ce . He wo u ld h av e to cons iderthe fact that these societ ies have been and still are mil i tar i ly ,eco n o mica l ly and in tel lectual ly vulnerablei n r e l a t io n to hiso w n . He wo u ld h av e to ask himself how he can acco u n t forth is sys tematic h is tor ical fact without cr i t ic is ing their condit ions an d ideologies , aswe l l as theco n d i t io n s an d ideologiesof h iso wnsociety whic h in theory denies the sys tematic s ignif icance of th is vulnerabi l i ty , and in pract ice re-enforces andd eep en s it . F in a l ly he wo u ld h av e to r e - ex amin e w h e th e r theex t r eme th eo r e t i ca l r e l a t iv i s m wh ich he believes is necessaryfor science,and isalso by a h a p p y c h a n c e an in d ica t io n ofhismo r a l i n t eg r i ty to war d s Na t iv e h u man b e in g s , d o es in factserve the cause ei ther ofscience or of a c o m m o n h u m a n i t y .1 817 An instructive example of the misunderstanding of the differencebetween a criticaland non-cri t ical approach to ideologyisrepresentedin the following comments by Me rton : . . . functiona lis ts , with theiremphasisonreligionas asocial mechanismfor' reinforcing the sentimen ts ' ,m ay not differ materially in their analyticalframework from Marx istswho, if the i r metaphor of 'opium of the masses' is converted intoa neutral s tatement of social fact, also assert that religion operatesasa social mechanism for reinforcing certain secular as well as sacredsentiments among its believers. The point of difference appe ars only

when evaluation of this commonly accepted fact came into quest ion.SocialTheorya ndSocialStructure, Glencoe, Free Press, 1957,p. 44.SuchMarxist assertionsare not neut ral s tatements ofsocial fact with anoptional flavouring of valuethey are epigrammatic references toa theory which incorporates a cri t ical approach towards his toricalmodes of consciousness. Whatever one may think of the theory as awhole,t he Marxis t s tatement about rel igion doesnotreferto thesamecommonly accepted fact as the functionalist.18For a recent discussion ofsome of these problems, seeCurrent Anthropology,December 1968.


16/16

148Perhaps one reason why these questions are not raised, orraised only to be contemp tuously brushed aside, is that unlikethe Western theorist of Western society, the Western anthropologist has notyet been compelled to argue with the objects of hisscientific contemplation. Is this not in effect the substance of therecent claim (in a synoptic account of political anthropology)that by concen trating on the relatively isolated , small-

scale , pre-in dus trial society, in which he is not himselfappa rently involved, the anthropologist avoids the problemof ideology which has thw arte d the work of such thinkersas M arx , Garlyle, Weber,Durkheim and K. Burke ?19 Is theepistemological privilege the anthropologist claims after allmuch more than a reflection of the political privilege heunconsciously enjoys as member of a prestigious professionin a powerful society confronting immeasurably weaker ones?

A . Cohen, Poli t ical anthrop ology: th e analysis of the symbolism ofpower relat ions ,Man, J u n e , 1969, pp. 227-8.

VII IN O M A D IS A TIO N A S A N E CO N O M IC

CAREER AMONG THE SEDENTARIESINTHE SUDAN SAVANNAH BELTGunnar Haaland

The relationship between ideology, environmental conditionsand economic activity is one of the problems elucidated byEvans-Pritchard in The Nuer. The Nuer preference for apastoral style oflife, the herdsm an's outlook , is docume ntedas it manifests itself in daily conversation, in ritual, in songsand play, and in verbal categories. Although Nuer have topractise some cultivation, Evans-Pritchard explicitly statesthat it is the pastoral life they prefer: Th e present numb erand distribution of cattle do not permit the Nuer to lead anentirely pastoral life as they would like to do, and possiblydid at one time. ...Amixed economy is therefore necessary. 1Nuer ideological statements abou t the good life fit theobserved facts of what people actually do; the ideologyemphasises cattle and a pastoral style of life, and householders among the Nuer do try to accumulate cattle. Themore cattle a person has, the less he has to rely upon milletcultivation and the greater is his freedom to migrate betweenplaces that are o ptimal for cattle in the various seasons.In this article I shall discuss the relationship betweenpastoral ideology and the premises on which the actors basetheir decisions to accumulate pastoral capital and to practisea migratory life. From the literature on nom ads the impressionoften arises that the ideology mirrors these premises or thatit is the premise. Basing my argument on material collecteddurin g two periods of fieldwork in Darfur (April 1965 to

1 E. E. Evans-Pri tchard, Th eNuer,Oxford, Claren don Press , 1940, p. 25.

Documents

Political Inequality in the Kababsih Tribe