| dc.description.abstract | The question of the origin and development of the state is a subject that has attracted scholarly interest from various disciplines. The interest is mainly due to the fact that the state's organization has become a very significant political issue: whose interests does the state serve? What powers has it acquired? How does it guarantee the rights of its citizens? In other words, the enquiry is basically concerned with the question of the distribution of power in society. And similar questions do also apply with respect to the 'early' state, the subject of this enquiry, which preceded the emergence of the modern nation state.
The different theoretical attempts to explain the origin and development of the state can, however, be grouped into two broad categories: those according to which social inequality or stratification was the prime mover towards statehood, and those which rnaintain that the state is based upon sane form of social contract. The former theory expresses more accurately the view of Marxist scholars, while the latter is more often subscribed to by those who believe that Marxism does not offer an adequate explanation of the origin and development of the state.
The object of this study was not to reconcile the two theoretical positions nor was it concerned to provide an alternative theory to explain the phenomenon of state formation on a world scale. Rather, its basic aim was to study the process of state formation in Acholi in order to understand what basic factors underlay these developments.
Contrary to current literature on the formation of Acholi states, the three case studies show that the phenomenon was the result of multiple factors in the ecology, economy and inter-societal environment. Each state emerged under a set of specific conditions following a long and gradual process of evolution.
Firstly, the evolution of state structures or institutions was significantly affected by the nature of the Acholi environment. Great limitations were placed by the environment on the nature and size of the social and political institutions that evolved as well as on the system of production.
The specific factors which triggered off the emergence of each state were, however, varied. The formation of Pajok state was, for Instance, the result of the conquest of the earlier settling communities by the ancestors of the royal clan. This event was itself conditioned by several factors - economic break-down due to the Nyamdere famine, ambition for leadership by the conquering group as well as their prior experience in political organization. All these factors acted iI1 conjunction with, and reinforced, one another.
In Obbo, the immediate cause of the rise to pre-eminence of the royal clan was their defeat of the Lokomini people. This was in turn, consequent upon pressures exerted by peoples moving westwards into Acholi from the Imatong mountain complex the movements seem to have been in response to the Nyamdere Famine which set many people’s migrating towards Acholi.
There is no evidence to indicate that the emergence of the two states was associated with the coming of migrants from the inter-lacustrine region. In fact, the states were formed before any significant number of migrants from the region came there, and there is no evidence to suggest that the concept and symbol of the drum as an embodiment of authority and the state played any role in this development.
The formation of Panyikwara state and the neighboring Ayom, Oloro, Palabek, and Pandiker chiefdoms was, on the other hand intimately associated with people coming from the ‘south'. And in the case of Panyikwara state, in particular, there is circumstantial evidence to indicate that the ancestors of the Pajule, who were instrumental in organizing the state, may have been Paluo migrants that came from Pajule kingdom in eastern Acholi.
It is further suggested that, their rise to pre-eminence was based on the utilization of the concept of the royal drum. However, the easy acceptance of this principle of organization was made possible by the existence of a famine. In the people's attempts to overcome these economic difficulties, the introduction of the concept, of the royal drum as an instrument of authority provided the catalyst for the emergence of state structures and institutions. It was, in other words, introduced at the appropriate moment when conditions were ripe for change.
Whether the concept, played the leading or secondary role in the formation of the states, but once they emerged the development, organization and unity of the states were closely based on the drum. The ruling hierarchies used the drum to strengthen their authorities and to subordinate the commoner groups. In Panyikwara state, the concept was made more effective by the association of royal drum with rainmaking ceremonies.
The concept and symbol of the drum, in other words, strengthened the positions of the ruling hierarchies and ensured the continued exploitation of the mass of producers of food and the perpetuation of the unequal access to resources between the class of rulers and the ruled.
Thus, when in 1861 the ivory trade was introduced in Acholi by Arab traders caning from northern Sudan, it was not particularly difficult for the ruling hierarchies to exploit their people by imposing a policy that every tusk of an elephant killed was to be given to the rwot. They became markedly ‘wealthy’ in contrast to the rest of the people.
However, the development of the ivory trade, and subsequently the trade in slaves, was accompanied by a spiral of violence. The ruling hierarchies, despite their apparent wealth vis-a-vis the commoners, were unable to contain the traders’ raids and so control the trade to their advantage. This inability was, in turn, reflective of the weak economic and political bases of the States themselves. They lacked strong standing armies and there was, moreover a technological gap in weaponry vis-a-vis the traders and the Africans that is, firearms versus spears.
The reaction of each community to the new situation, which took the form of either collaboration or passive resistance, was conditioned by this fact. Those rulers who collaborated with the traders, such as Otto of Obbo and Ogwok of Padibe, benefited from the booty that they obtained after raids against neighboring states. They also formed strong standing armies armed with firearms provided by the Arab traders. With these, they constantly raided other communities.
The incidence of violence continued even after the establishment of Egyptian rule in 1872. This was due partly to the weakness of the administration, but mainly because of certain policies adopted by the Egyptian rulers, such as the levying of grain tax, which encouraged the perpetuation of violence by the soldiers against the people.
The collapse of Egyptian authority in Acholi between 1884 and 1889 as a result of the Mahdist Revolution escalated the incidence of inter-polity and inter-ethnic fighting considerably as various groups took the opportunity to settle outstanding disputes by fighting. Consequently, warfare and defense became the pre-occupation of many communities. This continued till the close of the century when the British finally arrived on the scene.
The coming of the British was, therefore, timely and opportune to many communities since they were already worn out by constant fighting. Their reaction to the new situation was thus that of accommodation, rather than resistance, and this greatly facilitated the establishment of British rule in the area. Only in Pajok and Panto were there serious attempts to resist the colonizing power, but these were even due to the influence of Awich of Payira and Kabalega of Bunyoro who were desperately trying to rally the Acholi to resist the establishment of British rule.
After the establishment of British rule, nevertheless, the local rulers subsequently became the agents of colonial administration. It was through them that colonial policies were implemented or passed to the local people. | en |
