1

Brandon CarroHist 597G3/9/2014

Transformations and Ruptures in German East Africa

It is tempting to view political transformations as sudden and irrevocable breaks with the

past. The historiography of the past several decades has made it clear that when interpreting

African states, the end of the colonial era did not signify a complete departure from what had

been. A useful understanding of historical transformation, it is possible to apply this same theory

to the beginning of the colonial era. The beginning and continued process of German

colonialism in Tanganyika does not represent a complete break from the past. Rather, German

control resulted in the continuation and acceleration of pre-colonial processes in what became

known as German East Africa. The transfer of the German colony to a League of Nations

mandate operated by the British was also not a major break from the colonial era, although the

potential this move had was great. For the individual African though, it resulted in business as

usual.

The idea that German colonialism is not a break with the past is one that is present in the

historiography of the colonial period, although often not addressed specifically. In this study

several core texts of this historiography are examined. While they seldom directly explore this

idea, it will be shown that when reading these text in combination this argument is proven. This

has the benefit of addressing and accessing the historiography while still creating a meaningful

discussion about the nature of colonialism in Tanganyika. To this end it can be said that while

each text does a good job exploring its topic, there is no singular synthetic text that covers the

economy and labor relations of colonial Tanganyika with the context of German colonialism.

Because this text is missing, one is required to explore several different sources in order to arrive

2

at a more nuanced understanding of this topic. This shows that, like all historiographies, the sum

of the work is greater than the individual parts.

This study will be organized chronologically. It will begin with an examination of the

pre-colonial era and move into the period of German colonization. From here it will conclude

with the transfer of the colony to mandate rule. Each era will be broken down into thematic

sections regarding development of the economy and the organization of labor. This intertwined

analysis will show that the advent and era of German colonialism did not dramatically separate

Tanganyika from its pre-colonial existence. In the same way that decolonization in the 1960s

didn't create a tabula rasa for African states, neither did the colonization process of the 1880s.

To being the discussion of pre-colonial Tanganyika, the environment must be covered.

Abdul M.H. Sheriff's article in Tanzania under Colonial Rule addresses this topic, as well as the

pre-colonial era. To speak broadly, the area in which a person lives effects the degree to which

they can create a surplus of goods which can be reinvested within the society, allowing it to

grow.1 Tanganyika's varied environment meant that certain societies, such as those in the

interior, often could not produce enough goods to radically grow their villages.2 Coastal

societies on the other hand, often generated a greater surplus allowing them to grow faster.3 In

addition, costal societies also had access to global trade routes, connecting them and their

industry to the wider world. These communities experienced a dramatic change in the 19th

century, not as a result of German colonization, but rather from the Ngoni invasion.

In the 1840s the Ngoni people, refugees from further south, immigrated into Tanganyikan

land. They represent something of an internal African colonization. Lacking overall leadership,

1 Abdul M.H. Sheriff, "Tanzanian societies at the time of the Partition," in Tanzania under Colonial Rule, ed. M.H.Y. Kaniki. (Singapore: Singapore Offset Printing Pte Ltd, 1979), 18.2 Ibid., 19.3 Ibid., 37.

3

they affected communities differently.4 What can be directly said is that they greatly increased

the level of centralization in interior communities, as well as introducing new military techniques

and technologies. 5 The creation of more formal kingdoms lead to greater caravan trade with

coastal communities, connecting interior kingdoms with global trade. These kingdoms also

redefined labor relations within their societies.

The transformation of labor caused by the Ngoni invasions is the vast expansion of

slavery. Slavery is a topic of Deutsch's monograph Emancipation without Abolition, and is

useful in understanding the pre-colonial state of slavery. Both Sheriff's article and Deutsch's

monograph do considerable work in establishing pre-colonial Tanganyika. Deutsch's monograph

is perhaps too focused on its one theme to provide a broad picture, however.

As these kingdoms centralized and began trading with the coast, they increased

agricultural production which required more labor to function.6 Rather than enslave people

directly as a result of military conquest, people bonded their labor through kinship, and in

client/patron relationships.7 Instead of existing as peasants, they became laborers, slaves. It is

important to highlight that this form of slavery was different from the European style of slavery

practiced in the Americas. While these people were functionally slaves, they understood

themselves to be bonded laborers; this system has more in common with indentured servitude

than it does slavery regardless of its possible life-long condition. It is this unique understanding

of slavery that would later confuse the Germans.

This form of slavery was pervasive across Tanganyika. Not only did slaves work in the

interior, they were often traded to the coastal regions to work on plantations.8 Even though many 4 Ibid., 31.5 Ibid., 36.6 Jan-Georg Deutsch, Emancipation without Abolition in German East Africa c.1884-1914. (Ohio: Ohio University Press, 2006), 42.7 Ibid., 29.8 Ibid., 46.

4

people were slaves it was possible to avoid this condition, at least for young men. The new

centralized interior kingdoms needed a military to expand their holdings, and young men could

fulfill this role.9 While not fighting they often sat idle, mocking elders and living off of the labor

of others.10 Avoiding labor through military is also something which continued under German

rule, albeit with a minor transformations.

Sheriff's article greatly down plays the role of slavery, compared to Deutsch's

monograph. This is possibly because slavery is not the focus of his article. However, in doing

so he is perhaps inadvertently masking a certain reality and understanding of life in pre-colonial

Tanganyika. It is also possible that slavery was in his opinion, simply not something worth

remarking on; it was a form of labor not only present in Tanganyika, but in Africa as a whole and

as such very common. Deutsch's monograph works in a similar fashion to Sheriff's article, in

that it analysis labor forms and the economy. By focusing labor relations, he manages to capture

an element of life missing from Sheriff's article.

This is, in brief, an examination of the economy and labor relations in pre-colonial

Tanganyika. The development of costal plantation agriculture provided a valuable trade item

which the societies could barter with. Sold through the trading ports in Zanzibar, these

agricultural products would bring in manufactured goods from India, Europe, and the Americas.

These imported goods would then slowly disseminate through the rest of Tanganyika via

caravans making their way across the veld. Interior kingdoms saw greater centralization, the

expansion of the economy, and connection with coastal societies and markets.

What all these developments show is that Tanganyikan societies had transformed,

through their own pre-colonial practices and influences, into something new. A proto-colonial

9 Ibid., 29.10 Ibid., 47.

5

economy that relied on exporting raw materials in exchange manufactured goods had come into

being.11 This became a market that the European powers could not ignore, and it is a system that

would not be fundamentally altered by European colonists.

Hitherto in Tanganyika's history, the Sultanate of Zanzibar served as a middle man for

their trade with global networks. David Arnold's article in Tanzania under Colonial Rule

addresses the partition of East Africa, and it is useful in understanding the origins of colonial

conquest, even if it fails to speak more broadly about the colonial condition in Tanganyika. It

was perhaps only a matter of time before a European power came in and directly took over

Zanzibarian and Tanganyikan trade; this is doubly true considering the Sultan relied on British

gunboats to protect trade.12 While it may have seemed like the British would be first to colonize

Tanganyika given their close relationship with Zanzibar, it would be the Germans who colonized

this land.

Germany entered late into the race to acquire colonies. With the formation of the

German Empire in 1871 the German people could shift their gaze outwards. If the people, and in

particular the merchants, were focusing on the future of Germany on a global level, Bismarck's

government displayed little interest in establishing itself overseas. Indeed, German colonial

expansion was uneven, haphazard, and oddly planned. This is a reflection of the fact that private

industry initially started this process.

If Bismarck wouldn't raise the German flag across Africa, then the self styled explorers

and merchants of the new Reich would. It can be accurately stated that the creation of a German

11 Ibid.12 David Arnold, "External Factors in the Partition of East Africa," in Tanzania under Colonial Rule, ed. M.H.Y. Kaniki. (Singapore: Singapore Offset Printing Pte Ltd, 1979), 58.

6

overseas empire was a surrender to private interests.13 The Rulers of German Africa directly

addresses the conditions not just of Africa, but of Germany as it began its colonial experience.

German East Africa had its origins in the early 1880s. In 1884 Dr. Carl Peters, a

historian turned adventure, traveled to Tanganyika. During his expedition he signed what were

probably fraudulent treaties with the Africans living there, in which they swore loyalty (as much

as they understood that) to the German Empire.14 In Germany Peters had his journals published,

and popularized the idea of making Tanganyika into a colony. His argument for this rested not

only the economic benefits of controlling this market, but he also suggested that Tanganyika

would be an excellent location for scientific research, as well as raising the prestige of the

German nation and people.15

This is one of the ways in which Mulford's dissertation Changing Models is of particular

value; it covers in a clear and detailed manner how German explores helped create the colonial

empire. While The Rulers of German Africa does a tremendous job exploring those who led the

colonial empire in Africa, it does not fully address the few settlers in the colony. In particular, it

fails to address how the colonists attempted to gain further independent control of their colony.

This is something which Changing Models does well, and it is useful to read the two concert.

The German government was against using Imperial funds in setting up colonies. While

this meant that government would not create any colonies, Bismarck did approve of private

companies setting up colonies in Africa.16 He envisioned that German Africa would be formed

in the same way that the British East India Company had colonized the Subcontinent. To this

end, Bismarck chartered the Deutsch-Ostafrikanische Gesellschaft (German East Africa 13 L.H. Gann and Peter Duignan, The Rulers of German Africa, 1884-1914 (Sanford: Stanford University Press, 1977), 10.14 Martin R. Mulford, "Changing Models: The Discord Between the European Settlers and the Administration of German East Africa" (PhD diss., University of Rochester, 2005) 23.15 Gann and Duignan, Rulers, 37.16 Mulford, "Changing Models", 35.

7

Company, henceforth referred to as DOAG) to colonize and develop the economy of

Tanganyika.17 A treaty in 1891 gave the British Zanzibar and Germany the mainland, which

further enforced German control.18

Despite the best efforts of the DOAG, German East Africa was not an initial success.

While the German public supported the idea of having colonies, few private funds were invested

in Tangyanika..19 The lack of proper infrastructure to exploit the colony also held back its

performance.20 Despite its hesitance to directly involve itself in overseas affairs, the German

government took direct control of the DOAG, and made East German Africa an imperial

colony.21

With the transformation of German East Africa into a imperial colony, the German army

played a direct role in solidifying control of Tanganyika. The German army, and the colonial

service (such as it was), established stations across the land. This was with the help of native

soldiers called askari.22 Michelle Moyd's article on these soldiers will be covered in more detail

later. These stations pacified any resistance and managed to established imperial rule. Many

local chiefs sided with the Germans, although this was perhaps done out of an attempt to

maintain their own authority, rather than any particular love for the Germans.23

The Maji Maji rebellion that lasted from 1905 to 1907 proved to be the most direct

challenge to German authority. This rebellion happened because the Germans forced the native

people to grow cotton for export, rather than their traditional agricultural products.24 While an

17 Gann and Duignan, Rulers, 16.18 Mulford, "Changing Models", 39.19 Gann and Duignan, Rulers, 26.20 Ibid., 45.21 Mulford, "Changing Models", 35.22 Michelle Moyd, "Making Household, Making the State: Colonial Military Communities and Labor in German East Africa," International Labor and Working-Class History 80 (2011): 61.23 Temi, "Tanzanian Societies," 93.24 Gann and Duignan, Rulers, 105.

8

extremely violent conflict, the stations established across Tanganyika managed to end the

revolution. In his article in Tanzania under Colonial Rule, A.J. Temu discusses how the Maji

Maji revolutionaries were defeated by a relatively small number of colonial soldiers, most of

whom were Africans; their success was the result of superior weapons.25 His article perhaps

gives the best overview of the Maji Maji revolutions. The Rulers of German Africa focuses

mostly on the Europeans involved in the conflict, while Emancipation without Abolition says

very little on the revolt; it focuses on the effects of the rebellion on labor. Mandates and Empire

makes little mention of the rebellion, and Changing Models focuses on the effects of the

rebellion on the German colonialist, and the Imperial policies the revolt caused. The rebellion

did produce changes in German policy, but the exploitation of native labor remained the same.

Having suppressed revolutions across Tanganyika, the Germans were able to increase

their exploitation of the available resources. Using native labor both free and un-free, the

Germans oversaw the construction of three railway lines across Tanganyika. While unprofitable,

these rail lines did facilitate the transfer of goods across the countryside which in turn

accelerated the economy. There were political reasons for constructing these railways as well;

they were tangible objects that pro-colonial parties in the Reichstag could use as evidence for the

success of the civilizing mission.26

The development of infrastructure also coincided with increased efforts to educate the

people of Tanganyika. The Germans built the first European style schools. Scholars have

pointed out though that these schools existed not out of the good will of the colonizers, but rather

so that their laborers would be able to work more efficiently for them.27 Karim F. Hirji's article

25 A.J. Temu, "Tanzanian societies and colonial invasions 1875-1907" in Tanzania under Colonial Rule, ed. M.H.Y. Kaniki. (Singapore: Singapore Offset Printing Pte Ltd, 1979), 92.26 Mulford, "Changing Models", 67.27 Karim F. Hirji, "Colonial ideological apparatuses in Tanganyika under the Germans" in Tanzania under Colonial Rule, ed. M.H.Y. Kaniki. (Singapore: Singapore Offset Printing Pte Ltd, 1979), 201.

9

in Tanzania under Colonial Rule addresses the efforts of German colonial officers in trying to

educate their subjects. When combined with the other articles regarding education and ideology

in Tanzania under Colonial Rule, it provides an accurate picture. On its own though it is

somewhat limited.

The military pacification of Tanganyika, and the subsequent development of the local

infrastructure greatly accelerated the economy, but it did not fundamentally change it. Nor did

German colonization end slavery. The economy of Tanganyika relied upon traditional pre-

colonial processes: exporting agricultural products. Even the introduction of cotton cannot be

seen as a categorical shift away from standard crops. Much of the profit that the colonists

generated was from the taxation of these crops, rather than direct profit from their trade.28 In

addition to leaving the economy mostly unchanged, with the exception of additional taxes, the

Germans did not fundamentally alter labor relations.

In Emancipation without Abolition Deutsch claims that the German colonists became

morally bankrupt in an effort to make a profit.29 This is a fairly accurate claim considering that

despite the colonial government's claim to the contrary, slavery was not eliminated in German

East Africa.

There are several reasons why slavery was not abolished. To begin with, there were

security concerns regarding the liberation of slaves in German East Africa. Very few Germans

had actually moved to the colony, and those who had placed little faith in the military-colonial

government. As such, they often agitated for greater self administration.30 Because of this, the

colonial government needed a labor source it could rely upon as it could not necessarily count on

the few Germans living in Tanganyika. 28 Gann and Duignan, Rulers, 176.29 Deutsch, Emancipation, 97.

30 Mulford, "Changing Models", 123.

10

While present in Changing Models, this reason for the continuation of slavery is

completely absent from Emancipation without Abolition, which seems to be a rather strange

oversight. Indeed, it says practically nothing about the role of colonists, and instead focuses on

colonial officers. Perhaps in a weird sort of balance, Changing Models continues to assert that

German colonialism ended slavery. This is something which Emancipation without Abolition

proves to be inaccurate.

In addition to this, the colonial administration was worried that if the costal plantation

laborers became free in the a true sense, they would form a "dangerous proletariat" that could

further undermined the security of the colony.31 Besides security concerns, the German colonial

government failed to understand the very nature of slavery in Tanganyika. While slavery on the

coast was primarily plantation labor (something that wasn't going to be abolished), slavery in the

interior was defined as interpersonal-kinship relations (literal enslavement to one's family

members, not in the "paternal" sense of American slavery), or as a client/patron relationship.32

This relationship is categorically different from what the Germans understood slavery to be, that

is to say, an unlawful situation of economic exploitation. Because of this, the German colonial

leaders failed to recognize this relationship from what it was: slavery. It is also worth pointing

out that Moyd's article "Making the Household, Making the State", shows how Germans

continued the practice of using what was effectively slave labor from those who were unable to

meet their various obligations to the colonial state.33 Although it is not the focus of many of

these works, the role of the askari in maintaining and expanding slavery in the colony is

conspicuously missing in these readings.

31 Deutsch, Emancipation, 153.32 Ibid., 155.33 Moyd, "Making Household," 56.

11

This is not to say that the Germans were completely idle in ending slavery when they

recognized it as such. Colonial officers in German East Africa did end the buying and selling of

slaves on a large scale across the colony.34 In addition to this, they also pasted a law freeing

anyone born after 1901, as well as regulating when family members could indenture

themselves.35 Jan-Georg argues though that this legislature only legalized the subordinate

position of Tanganyika slaves. He does admit though that the Germans managed to end violent

enslavement.36 Through these actions, Germans could claim to have eliminated slavery as they

understood the term. In the specifically Tanganyika way slavery was practiced, it remained for

the most part unchanged from pre-colonial practices.

Moyd's article on the askari proves to be an useful example in further exploring how the

Germans both changed and yet also continued pre-colonial practices. In her article there are four

main points that speak to the effects of German colonialism: it shows the continuation of slave

labor, the similarity between avoiding slavery in both the pre-colonial and colonial periods, the

continuation of the ways in which families are organized via labor, and it introduces the way in

which wage labor slowly changed how Tanganyikans understood labor.

In her article it is made clear that the colonial government continued to use slaves for

their construction projects. In building military outposts across the land, and in constructing the

three railways across Tanganyika, Africans who either failed to pay their taxes or who had sold

themselves into bondage or who had been captured while rebelling, labored on these projects

next to the askari.37 Thus many of these projects weren't completed using free labor, but rather

those who continued to be enslaved through primarily pre-colonial practices.

34 Deutsch, Emancipation, 168.35 Ibid., 169.36 Ibid., 168. 37 Moyd, "Making Household," 61.

12

The askari played an interesting role in this arrangement; they were both laborers and

guards.38 This speaks to the dual nature in which German colonialism preserved pre-colonial

practices, and yet also gradually changed them. As stated earlier, before colonization young men

would become soldiers in order to avoid becoming slaves. After colonization, many young men

joined the askari for a different, but not categorically separate reason. Part of the German

civilizing mission was that Africans needed to work, and in joining the askari they played a

major role in constructing colonial infrastructure.39 While joining the askari did not remove one

from labor as being a pre-colonial soldier had, it did mean that you were a paid laborer, and a

respected soldier.40 While still required to do work, the askari held a higher social status and had

the ability improve their situation, unlike their slave counterparts. This is an example that Moyd

provides of German colonialism as a continuation of pre-colonial practices while also modifying

them.

The social organization of family labor as a result of the askari also remands similar to

pre-colonial practices. Moyd explores this through the way in which families were involved in

the askari. According to Moyd, askari soldiers often complained and performed poorly when

separated from their families.41 To alleviate this, German officers allowed the soldiers to bring

their wives and children with them to their stations.42 This bears a striking similarity to the pre-

colonial "caravan wives" that accompanied their husbands across Tanganyika, as well as the

practice of families entering into bonded labor together. Indeed, the Germans moved soldiers

from the Sudan to German East Africa, and these soldiers brought their wives along as well.

There is more work that could be done on the Frau Askari. Thus German policy regarding the

38 Ibid., 53.39 Ibid., 59.40 Ibid., 55.41 Ibid., 55.42 Ibid., 69.

13

families of askari soldiers continues pre-colonial practices of family labor. In a more general

sense, Moyd shows how the role and activities of the askari reinforce these pre-colonial

practices.

Of the texts examined in this study, the articles in Tanzania under Colonial Rule

examines the askari the most after Moyd's article. Even so, it spends little time focusing on the

role of askari as a labor force. Rather, it studies the way in which these soldiers were used in the

Maji Maji rebellion. This is in addition to highlighting the differences between where these

soldiers come from; many were taken from other parts of Africa. In particular, Temu spends

time discussing the differences between the early askari who were formed at the start of German

colonialism as a private force, and the units formed after the German government took over.

This is a distinction that Moyd does not explore in her article.

The studies from the historiography of German East Africa, when read in combination,

support the claim that German colonialism does not represent a major break from the pre-

colonial period. Rather, German colonial activities saw a continuation of earlier practices while

only causing minor change for Tanganyika write large. This is of course after the military

pacification of the country. The economy of German East Africa continued to exploit the land as

it had before the arrival of the Germans, although the infrastructure built by the Germans

certainly accelerated the economy. Slavery continued as well. While the Germans outlawed the

violent enslavement of individuals, as well as the sale of slaves, more idiomatically Tanganyikan

ways of enslavement through kinship and client/patron relationships continued. What the

Germans did introduce that was new was a broader practice of wage labor, though the creation of

organizations such as the askari. This summary, while brief, covers the general state of German

East Africa up till 1914.

14

The First World War had major consequences for German East Africa. A discussion of

the military campaign through the colony is beyond the scope of this study. It is suffice to say

that the military actions destroyed much of the infrastructure created by the Germans.43 What is

of true significance is the transformation of Tanganyika from a German colony to a League of

Nations mandate.

Michael D. Callahan's monograph Mandates and Empire is a work of considerable merit

which explores this topic. Although not specifically about Tanganyika, it addresses this colony

specifically in several places. At the end of the war, the Allied powers agreed to create

international mandates out of the colonies of the Central Powers. While they agreed to do so,

there was much confusion over what exactly a mandate was.44 Eventually an understanding is

reached which states that these territories like Tanganyika are to be political and legally

independent, but are to be administered by Allied powers.45 For Tanganyika, this transformation

brought considerable change in a political sense, but for individual Africans, much also remained

the same.

Because of Tanganyika's new international status as a legal country rather than a colony,

the British foundd themselves limited in what they can do. They cannot legally control the

country, so they are forced to practice indirect rule, which was radically different from the more

autocratic German practice of direct colonial officer rule.46 They also considered it illegal to

claim land for themselves, and by not doing so they allow much of the country to remain in the

hands of non-whites.47 The British also passed legislation outlawing bonded servitude, finally

ending slavery in all its forms in Tanganyika.48 The ending of slavery, indirect rule, and not 43 Mulford, "Changing Models", 160.44 Callahan, Mandate and Empire, 49.45 Ibid., 51.46 Ibid., 78.47 Ibid., 83.48 Ibid., 80.

15

claiming land are all major changes that Tanganyika's transformation into a mandate brought

about. This does not however mean that Tanganyika was completely transformed; much

remained as it had.

Tanganyika's status as a mandate meant that the British could not directly rule it. This

meant that they were unable to keep out Germans who decided to move back to their former

colony after the war. Many chose to do this, and African laborers often ended up working for

their old masters.49 It should be noted however that the number of Germans who moved back to

Tanganyika never exceeded the number that lived there before the war.50 In addition to the

return of the Germans, the British sold off many businesses to Asian and Indian companies.51

While Tanganyikas were free, they remained as laborers for others. The reality of mandate-

independence had many similarities to colonial rule, regardless of new legal changes.

These texts form a core component of the historiography of Tanganyika. When read in

combination, they provide valuable insight into the development of this colony. Individually

though, some of them fail to see the connections between pre-colonial Tanganyika and its

transformation into German East Africa. It is not completely accurate to say that all of these

texts agree with each other. On the other hand, saying they disagree wouldn't be entirely

accurate as well. Because they all have different topics, much of what is not mentioned in one is

covered in another. What is missing in the historiography of German colonial Africa is a

synthetic text that manages to discuss economic and labor relations within broad but detailed

German colonial context. Emancipation without Abolition comes close, although even this work

is missing some of the wider context needed to fully understand this topic.

49 Ibid., 135.50 Mulford, "Changing Models", 154.51 Callahan, Mandate and Empire, 95.

16

It is through these works that a significant argument emerges: German East Africa does

not represent a significant break from the past. Rather, the practices of the colonial state closely

mirrored that of the pre-colonial world, and the colony's transformation into a mandate, while

causing more change, did not majorly effect the lives of Tanganyikans. Even if some of these

individual works fail to grasp this larger point, when read in combination with each other they

show that Tanganyika's colonial era is unquestionably a dramatic continuation of pre-colonial

practices.

Bibliography

Arnold, David. " External Factors in the Partition of East Africa," in Tanzania under Colonial Rule, edited by. M.H.Y. Kaniki., 51-86. Singapore: Singapore Offset Printing Pte Ltd, 1979.

17

Callahan, Michael D.: Mandate and Empire: The League of Nations and Africa, 1914-1931 Portland: Sussex Academic Press, 2008.

Deutsch, Jan-Georg: Emancipation without Abolition in German East Africa c.1884-1914. Ohio: Ohio University Press, 2006.

Gann, L.H. and Duignan, Peter: The Rulers of German Africa, 1884-1914. Sanford: Stanford University Press, 1977.

Hirji, Karim F. "Colonial ideological apparatuses in Tanganyika under the Germans" in Tanzania under Colonial Rule, edited by. M.H.Y. Kaniki., 192-236. Singapore: Singapore Offset Printing Pte Ltd, 1979.

Moyd, Michelle. " Making Household, Making the State: Colonial Military Communities and Labor in German East Africa," International Labor and Working-Class History 80 (2011): 53-76.

Mulford, Martin R.: "Changing Models: The Discord Between the European Settlers and the Administration of German East Africa." PhD diss., University of Rochester. 2005.

Sheriff, Abdul M.H.. "Tanzanian societies at the time of the Partition," in Tanzania under Colonial Rule, edited by. M.H.Y. Kaniki., 11-51. Singapore: Singapore Offset Printing Pte Ltd, 1979.

Temu, A.J. "Tanzanian societies and colonial invasions 1875-1907" in Tanzania under Colonial Rule, edited by. M.H.Y. Kaniki., 86-128. Singapore: Singapore Offset Printing Pte Ltd, 1979.