Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Patrons, Clients, and Empire: The Subordination of Indigenous Hierarchies in Asia and Africa

Patrons, Clients, and Empire: The Subordination of Indigenous Hierarchies in Asia and Africa colin newbury Oxford University of empire have frequently referred to models of dependency between termiH istorianssubordinationrulers and subordinate societies. Themutual nology of covering "subsidiary alliances," "paramountcy," "protectorates," "indirect rule," or "collaboration" indicates a need to account for the ways in which imperial hierarchies functioned in the absence of sustained coercion at the interface between "rulers" and "ruled". The notion of modus vivendi is implicit in this equilibrium, compared with the disequilibrium of conquest. So, too, is the idea of degrees of control and supervision.1 Others who have emphasized the notion of overt and passive resistance to account for political change within the framework of colonial government still have to explain the more usual amount of accommodation.2 Moreover, many of the structures utilized by colonial administrations at the district level have not disappeared. Beneath the rhetoric surrounding "colonialism" and "nationalism" there still lies a broad topic concerning the interaction of imperial agents, their political successors, and local leaders in regional histories, and that can benefit from comparative treatment. The specific topic of this essay is concerned with the ways in which power and authority were exercised through indigenous leaders in a 1 D. A. Low, Lion Rampant: Essays in http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of World History University of Hawai'I Press

Patrons, Clients, and Empire: The Subordination of Indigenous Hierarchies in Asia and Africa

Loading next page...
 
/lp/university-of-hawai-i-press/patrons-clients-and-empire-the-subordination-of-indigenous-hierarchies-AqCZkK5cPF
Publisher
University of Hawai'I Press
Copyright
Copyright © 2000 by University of Hawai'i Press.
ISSN
1527-8050
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

colin newbury Oxford University of empire have frequently referred to models of dependency between termiH istorianssubordinationrulers and subordinate societies. Themutual nology of covering "subsidiary alliances," "paramountcy," "protectorates," "indirect rule," or "collaboration" indicates a need to account for the ways in which imperial hierarchies functioned in the absence of sustained coercion at the interface between "rulers" and "ruled". The notion of modus vivendi is implicit in this equilibrium, compared with the disequilibrium of conquest. So, too, is the idea of degrees of control and supervision.1 Others who have emphasized the notion of overt and passive resistance to account for political change within the framework of colonial government still have to explain the more usual amount of accommodation.2 Moreover, many of the structures utilized by colonial administrations at the district level have not disappeared. Beneath the rhetoric surrounding "colonialism" and "nationalism" there still lies a broad topic concerning the interaction of imperial agents, their political successors, and local leaders in regional histories, and that can benefit from comparative treatment. The specific topic of this essay is concerned with the ways in which power and authority were exercised through indigenous leaders in a 1 D. A. Low, Lion Rampant: Essays in

Journal

Journal of World HistoryUniversity of Hawai'I Press

Published: Oct 1, 2000

There are no references for this article.