‘Caste’ in Africa: the evidence from south-western Ethiopia reconsidered

Abstract

Abstract This article questions the prevalent use of the ‘caste’ concept to describe marginalised occupational minorities in the south-western Ethiopian context. Three types of objection are discussed: ideological, genetic and structural, relating to cultural, historical and social factors respectively. In ideological terms, marginalisation is generally not justified through a coherent religious philosophy; myths are often absent, are seldom elaborate and do not explain adifferentialranking of occupational groups. Notions of pollution are prevalent and usually presented in the dominant idiom of food transgressions; but the farming majority is not considered pure. In genetic terms, none of the existing models explains the origins of all marginalised groups. Whereas the ‘remnants’ model is largely discredited, and the ‘internal differentiation’ model currently favoured, this article emphasises the importance of migration, which is intimately linked with non-farming occupations as well as with marginalised and minority statuses. The lack of a single cross-culturally valid model, combinations of explanations, and differences among various types of occupational groups within and between groups, all militate against a ‘caste’ interpretation of the origins of marginalised groups in south-western Ethiopia. In structural terms ‘caste’ is not used for the farming majority but only for minority craftsmen and hunters. However, the argument that relations between the marginalised and the dominant groups are based on dyadic patron-client relations does not invalidate the clear structural political, economic and social marginalisation. As for the argument that the marginalised form a single undifferentiated bloc, it is suggested that, though strict hierarchies are rare, endogamy makes for differentiation. Rather than a lack of ranking, spatial variations and changes over time deserve explanation; this suggests that one cannot speak of a coherent organisational principle such as one would expect to find in ‘caste’ societies. It is concluded that the lack of a uniform ideological cultural underpinning, the complex and varied origins and processes of marginalisation, and the specific structural relations between the majority and the dominated groups, all suggest that the ‘caste’ concept is of minimal analytical value and is therefore best left to the Indian context. A better understanding of marginalisation can start by analysing different local conceptions, and how endogamy structures differentiation and is related to occupation. A clearer analysis of marginalisation processes would mean tracing migrations, competition for resources and changing technological, economic, social and cultural relations between craft producers and dominant groups and interactions across ethnic boundaries.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 55 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.