Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site spar.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!spar!ellis
From: ellis@spar.UUCP (Michael Ellis)
Newsgroups: net.nlang.africa
Subject: Re: `Tribe': derogatory?
Message-ID: <248@spar.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 16-May-85 06:00:39 EDT
Article-I.D.: spar.248
Posted: Thu May 16 06:00:39 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 19-May-85 06:13:53 EDT
References: <> <336@lasspvax.UUCP> <120@harvard.ARPA>
Reply-To: ellis@spar.UUCP (Michael Ellis)
Organization: Schlumberger Palo Alto Research, CA
Lines: 69


    In a recent article, Stavros Macrakis examines the words: nation, state,
    tribe, people, and ethnic group. He suggests that `tribe' and `ethnic
    group' may be the most accurate terms for referring to the groups that
    characterize many African peoples.

    Though Stavros's article was generally thoughtful and accurate,
    I believe that the word `tribe' may be perceived as derogatory, 
    even when it is not intended that way:

    "The classification of African political units as `tribes' also
    "made a major distinction between Europeans and Africans. Historically,
    "the term was used to denote subordinate units, such as the divisions
    "of the ancient Romans into Sabines, Latins, and Etruscans. The tribe 
    "was regarded as a more primitive unit, which in time evolved into a 
    "civilized one. The tribe was too small and lacked the complex 
    "organization and functions of a nation. Social Darwinism of the 19th
    "century justified this as the order of things for Africa. The Caucasian
    "type was represented as possessing superior linguistic, political, and
    "cultural capacities. Since, in the European view, African politics had
    "not reached the level of complex, centralized systems of government,
    "without which the higher attainments of civilization could not be
    "achieved, the term `tribe' was employed. One hardly needs to state
    "that the term `Negro' is pejorative, stereotypic, and meaningless as a
    "descriptive for Africans. In short, as with terms `Hamitic' and
    "`native', `tribe' and `negro' as general labels for Africans suggest
    "denigratory characterizations and therefore prejudge the African or
    "black experience.

     	-- Joseph E. Harris, `Africans and Their History' (1972)

    In this regard, please note that Europeans never refer to themselves
    by the term `tribe' except in the earliest historical periods. 
    (eg. `Teutonic tribes') And their are many examples where the
    definition of `tribe' presented in Stavros's article:

> In general, it refers to groups which do not have their own country.

    ... might seem to fit. For instance, have YOU ever heard anyone
    refer to the Serbian/Basque/Breton/Ruthenian tribes? Note, however,
    that the word is freely applied to the original peoples of North
    and South Americas, Africa, and Australia. These same people also
    count among the those least understood by the European mind.

    Might there be some connection?
    
    Another point, illustrated by the fragment below:

>> ... the "national" boundaries of [Africa] may be ...  arbitrary
>> territories ([with] *some* relationship to kinship communities....)
>> set up within the last 2 or 3 centuries by ...  westerners.

    There is much truth to this, but what often passes unnoticed is that
    Africa's history includes many kingdoms and states with more
    cohesiveness and culture than the word `kinship communities' would
    imply. Europeans have never failed to ignore this fact.

    If you read about Africa's history, you will discover many peoples and
    cultures, not only the familiar nations of Egypt and Ethiopia, but also
    the Nubians, the Moroe:, the ancient kingdoms of Ghana, Mali, and
    Songhai, the Hausa states of Daura, Gobir, Katsina, Kano, and Zaria, the
    Ibos and their Yoruba neighbors, the kingdoms and states of the Oyo, the
    Futas, Ashanti, and Dahomey, the stateless Nilotic Dinka and Nuer
    peoples, and the Ngola, to mention but a few.

    Until I know better, I believe it makes the most sense to refer to
    the `peoples of Africa'. Comments?

-michael