This article is reproduced under the Creative Commons License
Part One
By Chris Lowe
First Published By Howard University Centre For African Studies in 2001
The Trouble With The Word “Tribe”
Invite your students to investigate the history and hidden meanings of the word “tribe.”
For many people in Western countries, the subject of Africa immediately calls up the word “tribe.” Few readers question a news story describing an African individual as a “tribesman” or”tribeswoman,” or the depiction of an African’s motives as “tribal.”
Many Africans themselves use the word “tribe” when speaking or writing in English about community, ethnicity or identity in African states.
Yet today most scholars — both African and non-African — who study African states and societies agree that “tribe” promotes misleading stereotypes. The term “tribe” has no consistent meaning. It carries misleading historical and cultural assumptions. It blocks accurate views of African realities.
At best, any interpretation of African events that relies on the idea of tribe contributes no understanding of specific issues in specific countries. At worst, it obscures the reality that African identities and conflicts are as diverse, ambiguous, complex, modern and dynamic as those found anywhere else in the world.
What’s wrong with “tribe”?
“Tribe” promotes a myth of primitive African timelessness. The general sense of tribe as most people understand it is associated with
primitiveness. To be in a tribal state is to live in an uncomplicated, traditional condition.
Most African countries are economically poor and often described as less developed or underdeveloped. Westerners often conclude that these societies have not changed much over the centuries and that African poverty mainly reflects cultural and social conservatism.
Interpreting present-day Africa through the lens of tribes reinforces the image of timelessness. The truth is that Africa has as much history as anywhere else in the world. It has undergone momentous changes time and again, especially in the 20th century. While African poverty is partly a product of internal dynamics of African societies, it has also been caused by the histories of external slave trades and colonial rule. In the West, “tribal” often implies “savage.” When the general image of tribal timelessness is applied to situations of social conflict between Africans, a particularly destructive myth results. Stereotypes of primitiveness and conservative backwardness are also linked to images of irrationality and superstition. The combination leads to portrayal of violence and conflict in Africa as primordial, savage and unchanging. This image resonates with traditional Western racist ideas and can suggest that irrational violence is inherent and natural to Africans.
Just as particular conflicts elsewhere in the world have both rational and irrational components, so do those in Africa. The vast majority of African ethnic conflicts could not have happened a century ago in the ways that they do now. Pick almost any place where ethnic conflict occurs in modern Africa. Investigate carefully the issues over which it occurs, the forms it takes, and the means by which it is organized and carried out. Recent economic developments and political rivalries will loom much larger than allegedly ancient and traditional hostilities. Ironically, some African ethnic identities and divisions now portrayed as ancient and unchanging actually were created in the colonial period. In other cases, earlier distinctions took new, more rigid and conflictual forms over the last century.
The changes came out of communities’ interactions within a colonial or post-colonial context, as well as movement of people to cities to work and live. The identities thus created resemble modern ethnicities in other countries, which are also shaped by cities, markets and national states. If “tribe” is so flawed, why is it so common? “Tribe” reflects widespread but outdated 19th-century social theory.
This essay was adapted with permission from “Talking About ‘Tribe’: Moving From
Stereotypes to Analysis,” originally published by the Africa Policy Information Center
in 1997. The principal author was Chris Lowe, a historian of Africa who lives in
Portland, Ore. Additional research was provided by Tunde Brimah, Pearl-Alice Marsh, William Minter and Monde Muyangwa.
