NAME

FIDELIS

SURNAME

: MBEWE

REG NUMBER

: R132756B

MODE OF ENTRY

: PARALLEL

PROGRAMME

: BACHELOR OF ARTS IN HISTORY HONOURS DEGREE

MODULE:

AFRICA IN THE 21ST CENTURY

MODULE CODE

: HIH 422

LECTURER

: DR MAZAMBANE

QUESTION:

Do you subscribe to the view that Dictatorial tendencies in Africa have any origins in precolonial times?

The view that dictatorial tendencies have their origins in pre-colonial times in Africa is both
preposterous and misleading. It is a baseless euro-centric perception and should be thrown in
the dustbin of history and be forgotten about. The political of Africa is complex and western
attempts of interpreting it has led to these gross fallacies. This verdict stands its justification
especially with great cognisance of the facts that pre-colonial Africa was heterogeneous in
nature, political activities differed in time and place e.g. between (1BC to 100AD) the history
of Africa particularly southern Africa was dominated by paolithic, Mesolithic and Neolithic
primitive san and khoikhoi who knew not any form of submission to any regime but based
their daily conduct on primitive communalism. The period from 1000AD to a period of 1880s
short before colonialism in 1890, highlighted by the rise of new states in Africa i.e. Iron age
politics were not dictatorial but in no doubt subjects owed allegiance to the king as the king
to his people, in North and other parts of Africa the system was different but did not bear the
name dictatorship, it was a normal political way of life agreed upon by the people. The
architecture of this paper does not deny the presence of dictatorship in Africa but denies
vehemently the allegations that it is a pre-colonial phenomenon. Dictatorship is a colonial
manufactured idea of Africans due their so called supposes barbarism, blood thirsty and
uncivilized characteristics. It`s only speculative and assumptions. More shall be propounded
on as the essay gains in momentum.

First and foremost, it needs to be highlighted that African political systems are described in a
number of textbooks and general books on African history . Ngugi wa Thiongo, in claiming
that Africas pre-colonial peasant cultures had oppressive reactionary tendencies that were
only slightly less grave than the racist colonial culture might be overstating the case, but he
nevertheless strikes a chord.1 Ehret 2000 emphasizes the diversity and long history of precolonial social and political formations, merely subscribing to perceptions of dictatorial
tendencies having their origins in pre-colonial africa is a failure to understanding a detailed
study of Africa history before its distortion by colonial historians. Prior to European
colonization in the late 19th century, Africa had a very long history of state building as well
as a rich variety of social formations that were decentralized or stateless. Some of the first
examples of state formation in human history developed in the Nile River valley in the 4th
millennium BCE.2 Nevertheless, during most of Africas pre-colonial history, a significant
portion of African people lived in small-scale, egalitarian societies in which government was
more a matter of consensus among the entire adult population than rule by an elite few. One
2

of the major contributions that historians of pre-colonial Africa have made is to demonstrate
the enormous variety and complexity of pre-colonial African political systems and to
challenge the notion that political complexity only exists in centralized states. Consequently
therefore one does not need a sky rocket scientist to note that dictatorial tendencies in Africa
have their origins in pre-colonial times, very misleading, baseless and does not much water.
From Nigeria to Ghana, Zimbabwe to Egypt and all across Africa, all historical sources alike
including written documents, oral traditions and anthropology represent an interesting
homogeneity in terms of African politics. African politics are complex and even though, they
indicate forms of democracy. For instance Ian Phermister often argues that Zimbabwean precolonial states contrary to European perceptions particularly with regards to the Ndebele
state, there was democracy. Colonial Historians had labelled king Mzilikazi and the Ndebele
state as authoritarian, militaristic and used cohesion to rule their subjects. Facts however
proved otherwise, the Kings never ruled alone but with the help of chiefs, family members
and family heads, a typical example of democratic tendencies.3 Consequently one would not
be misfiring to assert that dictatorial tendencies in Africa are unfounded false accusation of
pre-colonial African rulers and trying to link with contemporary Africa.
To add more flavour to this paper would be a brief case study of pre-colonial South Africa
based on scholarly evidence and facts. For example Before Africa was colonized, the
continent was characterized by a large degree of pluralism and flexibility. The continent
consisted not of closed reproducing entities, equipped with unique unchanging cultures, but
of more fluid units that would readily incorporate outsiders (even whites) into the community
as long as they accepted its customs, and where the sense of obligation and solidarity went
beyond that of the nuclear family. An example of such inclusiveness was the Xhosa, the
Mutapa and as such who limited Xhosadom or Mutapadom, Ndebeledom not along ethnic or
geographical lines but along political.4 All persons or groups who accepted the rule of the
paramount chief became Xhosa or Ndebele.
Pre-colonial African societies were of a highly varied nature. They could be either stateless,
state run or kingdoms, but most were founded on the principles of communalism in that they
were self-governing, autonomous entities, and in that all members took part, directly or
indirectly, in the daily running of the tribe. Land was held commonly and could not be bought
or sold, although other things, such as cattle, were owned individually.5 In those societies that
were not stateless, the chiefs ran the daily affairs of the tribe together with one or more
3

councils. These councils simultaneously informed the chief, checked his powers and made
policy by reaching unanimous decisions. If unanimity was not reached, a village assembly
would be called to debate the issue and majority ruling would now apply. The chief would
listen silently to all queries during such meetings and every male adult was free to criticize
him.6 As a result therefore one is made to wander how such pathetic nauseating falsities of
African politics can be ascribed as having imbued the origins of dictatorial tendencies in precolonial Africa.
An overarching feature of pre-colonial Africa was that its societies were not designed to be
the all-powerful entities that they are today, hence the abundance of confederation-type
societies. One reason for this was that the villages and tribes commonly owned the land, a
fact that undermined the basis for a market economy and a landed aristocracy, another that
there was an abundance of available land to which dissatisfied individuals or groups could
move.7 The creation of a market economy in Southern Africa was further undermined by the
area lacking the regular markets and trade fairs that flourished elsewhere in Africa, as well as
in medieval Europe, and thus the potential for continuous economic development.
In many parts of Africa, especially in the British colonies where indirect rule was the norm,
the indigenous system of government survived and was used by the colonial powers
alongside the colonial system.8 This is one of the reasons why the structures of such political
institutions still exist in Africa today, although mostly in a more fixed and static form, due to
the colonial powers having rearranged the tribal landscape and employed chiefs as virtual
colonial administrators that served as buffers between themselves and the masses. British
indirect rule in countries such as South Africa thereby reduced chiefs to salaried officials,
responsible to white magistrates, corrupted by the control of an unsympathetic white
government.9 Where there were elements of participatory democracy and a lack of rigid
ethnicity in pre-colonial Africa, these were less likely to be found in post-independence
After having specified and refused to subscribe to such a preposterous and misleading
subscription of African political standards, the million dollar question is....Where and when
did dictatorial tendencies occure or originates in Africa? This is very interesting question
which needs no one to crack their brains. Dictatorial tendencies originated as far back as the
Roman Empire fell upon European autocracies that then carried the poison to African states.
When colonialism reached Africa the western powers used their forms of administrations
where there was direct rule and in indirect rule still complimented it with part of their
4

government structures of centralizing power viz r vee dictatorship.10 In context of European

modes of political dissemination, a dictatorship is a type of authoritarianism, in which
politicians regulate nearly every aspect of the public and private behavior of citizens.
Dictatorships and totalitarianism generally employ political propaganda to decrease the
influence of proponents of alternative governing systems. Without saying much it can be
noted that dictatorial tendencies took shoots/ roots in the colonial times in Africa and not vice
versa.

In succinct words it is very plausible for one to conclude by further vehement denial of the
verdict that dictatorial tendencies in Africa have their origins in pre-colonial times.
Subscribing to such a misconception of facts is a Eurocentric uniformed subjective fallacy of
Africas past. Africa or pre-colonial Africa is a very complex heterogeneous affair with no
well defined political outlook. Issues of dictatorship are a failure to comprehend the History
of Africa and a weak try of interpreting it using Eurocentric perspective.

REFERENCE LIST
1. N, Thiongoo, Detained, Heinemann, 1981, page 106
2. Ibid p.g.103-5
3. C, Ehret. The Civilizations of Africa: A History to 1800. Charlottesville: University of
Virginia Press, 2002.
4. C, Hamilton,, Bernard Mbenga, and Robert Ross, eds. The Cambridge History of
South Africa. 2 vols. Cambridge, UK, and New York: Cambridge University Press,
20102011.
5. Ibid
6. J, Ki-Zerbo, , G. Mokhtar, M. El Fasi, I. Hrbek, D. T. Niane, and Adu A. Boahen.
General History of Africa. 8 vols. London: Heinemann, 19811988
7. P, Kaarsholm et al, Inventions and boundaries: historical and anthropological
approaches to the study of ethnicity and nationalism, IDS, Roskilde University, 1994
8. L, Thomson, A history of South Africa, Yale University Press, 1990, page 11-29 and
76-78
9. G, Ayittey, Africa Betrayed, MacMillan, london, 1992, page 12, 38-46, 325
10. Http//:www.merriam-webster.com. (Retrieved 2008-08-)

BLIBIOGRAPHY

Ehret, Christopher. The Civilizations of Africa: A History to 1800. Charlottesville: University

of Virginia Press, 2002.
George, Africa Betrayed, MacMillan, London 1992,
Hamilton, Carolyn, Mbenga, and Robert Ross, eds. The Cambridge History of South Africa.
2 vols. Cambridge, UK, and New York: Cambridge University Press, 20102011.
Http://www.merrian-webster.com/dictator Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online
Dictionary". www.merriam-webster.com. (Retrieved 2016/24/080
Kaarsholm P,et al, Inventions and boundaries: historical and anthropological approaches to
the study of ethnicity and nationalism, IDS, Roskilde University, 1994
Ki-Zerbo, J, G. Mokhtar, M. El Fasi, I. Hrbek, D. T. Niane, and Adu A. Boahen. General
History of Africa. 8 vols. London: Heinemann, 19811988
Leonard Thomson, A history of South Africa, Yale University Press, 1990, page 11-29 and
76-78
Nelson Mandela, Long walk to freedom, Abacus, 1997, page 4, 24-25
Ngugi wa Thiongoo, Detained, Heinemann, 1981