.
Similarities:
1 . In both cases, policy making was done at home by the metropolitan governments. The
parliaments passed their policies to the colonies through the secretaries for colonies. Local authorities made policies concerning minor issues.
2. Both systems established new laws based on home judicial systems. For example the French code Napoleon and the British judicial system were used in settling issues in the colonies. They both undermined the local authorities and they regulated punishments to local authorities in regard with European statute.
3. Both systems employed Africans at lower levels of administration. e.g. all posts from the district commissioner to the governor-general were filled by the British and pure Frenchmen.
4. Both systems were built on fundamental misconception that the Africans were backward in the level of civilisation and the colonial administrative policies were designed to develop Africans.
5. Both systems had legislative councils. These institutions were initially established by the British but later the French also developed them. They were meant to enact some laws and take them for approval in metropolitan colonial offices.
6. Both indirect rule and assimilation failed to achieve what they were set to do. Indirect rule failed to preserve the traditional institutions while assimilation was abandoned in favour of Association.
7. Both systems used indirect and direct rule. They employed the traditional chiefs to govern on their behalf. Where there were no recognised chiefs both systems appointed their own chiefs (warrant) thus making it direct rule. In East Africa, the British used direct rule to govern Eastern Uganda, in West Africa towns like Kaduna, Lagos and Free Town, the British ruled them directly.
8. In both systems, chiefs were not answerable to their colonial masters. The French and British had no respect for traditional authority in African societies. The French had no respect for monarchs and constantly undermined them. Similarly, the British destroyed the powers of some African leaders e.g. the Asante Hene chiefs in Asante Empire.
9. Both systems survived on colonial exploitation based on taxation and forced labour. In both cases African local leaders were used to collect taxes and supervise forced labour.
It's against this background of these similarities that some historians have asserted that the
differences between indirect rule and assimilation were more mythical than real. In both systems the Africans were used as mere functionaries of the colonial rule. They had the same impact on traditional institutions and the colonised peoples suffered almost similar consequences.
Differences:
1. The French established a highly centralised and authoritarian administration. The French administered alltheir colonies as a federation under the governor General at Dakar under who was a hierarchy of officials in each colony. The British on the other hand established a separate administration in the colonies. i.e the British colonies were administered independent from the other and got orders from the secretary for colonies based in London.
2. Assimilation policy was more expensive in terms of manpower requirements and financial costs than the British indirect rule. The French emphasis on the employment of the French citizens including who were assimilated was more costly than the British employment of traditional or local chief who in actual sense paid himself through. locally generated revenues. Perhaps this is why the French had to abandon assimilation by 1905 the British went on with their system up to the period of independence of their colonies.
3. The British tried to use indirect rule and respected the traditional customs and leaders while the French tried to use assimilation policy that never had such characteristics.
4. The British respected the traditional methods of choosing chiefs and respected rules of succession. The French on the other hand chose their own leaders whom they posted in French West Africa. Hence the local chiefs under the French were nominees who lacked the traditional approval obviously these were from the French citizens group.
5. They differed in their attitude towards colonies. While the British regarded them as separate entities, the French regarded them as the overseas provinces.
6. The French policy of assimilation led to the creation of French citizens while the British made no attempts to turn the Africans into British. The assimilated Africans enjoyed all the rights and privileges of the French citizens. Africans were also allowed to have representatives in the French National Assembly. The British system did not provide for anything of this nature.
7. Unlike assimilation policy that aimed at destroying African cultural and social institutions, indirect rule did not attack African culture and social life atleast directly. This was probably because of the British superiority complex and fear of devastating and disintegrating African society in the process of cultural intermixture. The British had a respect and fear of African cultures.
8. The African chiefs under the British enjoyed more power and authority than those of the French. Whereas both used chiefs to collect taxes, the British allowed some control of finance to the local chiefs while the French took away all the revenue and used it the way they chose.
9. In the French West Africa all the revenue was collected to the central pool in federal pool (treasury) at Dakar. It was the duty of the Governor general to use it for the benefit of the colonies. On the other hand each colony in the British West Africa managed its own financial resources. Therefore, the development of each colony depended on the revenu
collected. In French West Africa development was more equitable because revenue was shared according to need of each colony.
10. The British unlike the French did not attempt to pass laws in English legislature for all their African colonies or protectorates. Instead, the governor of each territory drew up laws according to the area under his authority. However, its important to recognise the fact that laws made in the British colonies and protectorates had to be approved by the British secretary of state for colonies based in London. He could pass it, amend, criticise or cancel it down.
Revision Questions.
1 "The French and British methods of colonial administration in Africa were similar not different". Discuss with reference to West Africa.
2. Why and with what impact did the French abandon their assimilation policy in West
Africa?
3. "Indirect rule was more of a myth than a reality". Discuss this statement in the context of
British administration in either Uganda or Nigeria.
4. Do you consider the French assimilation policy as a success or a failure? Discuss with reference to either Maghreb or West Africa.
5. Why did the indirect rule work in Northern Nigeria and not in in southern Nigeria?
6. Why and with what success did the British adopt the system of indirect rule in Northern
Nigeria up to 1914?
7. Compare the British and French administrative policies in West Africa.
8. Examine the differences and similarities between the French and British methods of colonial administration
No comments:
Post a Comment