Veröffentlichungen des Frobenius-Instituts
An der Goethe-Universität zu Fr ankfurt am Main

Studien zur Kulturkunde
Begründet von Leo Frobenius
Her ausgegeben von roland har denberg, Holger Jebens,r ichar d kuba und sophia thubauville132. Band

Reimer
2018

THE STATE OF STATUS GROUPSIN ETHIOPIAMINORITIES BET W EEN MA RGINALIZATION
AND INTEGR ATION
Susanne Epple (ed.)

Reimer2018

Bibliographische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek
Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der
Deutschen Nationalbibliographie; detaillierte bibliographische Daten sind im
Internet über http://dnb.d-nb.de abrufbar.

Umschlaggestaltung: Elmar Lixenfeld
Umschlagbild: Representation of various crafts on the fuld’o meeting hallin Konso, Ethiopia (2003) © Herrmann Amborn
Gedruckt mit freundlicher Unterstützung der Frobenius-Gesellschaft e. V.
Satz und Layout: michon, Hofheim
Druck: druckhaus köthen GmbH & Co. KG, Köthen
© 2018 by Dietrich Reimer Verlag GmbH, Berlinwww.reimer-verlag.deAlle Rechte vorbehalten
Printed in Germany
Gedruckt auf alterungsbeständigem PapierISBN 978-3-496-01587-1

Ta b l e o f C o n t e n t s

Acknowledgements  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 7Dena Freeman: Foreword .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 9Susanne Epple: Introduction .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 11
I . T R A N S F O R M AT IO N A N D M A N I P U L AT IO N
OF SOCI A L DIFFER ENCE

Susanne Epple: The transformation of status groups in Ethiopia.
Recent observations .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 33
Samuel Tibebe: The chances and limitations of integration through conversion toevangelical Christianity. The case of the Manja in Dawro, southern Ethiopia .  .  . 49
Bosha Bombe: Heritages of slavery and status transformation.
Evidence from Ganta, Gamo highlands of southern Ethiopia  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 65
Susanne Epple and Fabienne Braukmann: Overcoming layers of marginalization.
Adaptive strategies of the Bayso and the Haro people of Lake Abbaya,
southern Ethiopia  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 79
Graziano Savà: Code-switching from Bayso and Haro to Amharicas a status-change strategy .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 101
Hermann Amborn: Continuity and change in the relationship between
artisans and farmers in southern Ethiopia .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 121
I I . PE R S I S TA N C E O F M A RG I N A L I Z AT IO N

Desalegn Amsalu: The social reproduction of marginalization among
the Kumpal-Agaw of northwest Ethiopia .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 139
Kiya Gezahegne: Living on the margins in the Rayya Qobbo highlands.
Slave descendants in contemporary north Wollo, Amhara Region .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 157
Alexander Meckelburg: Minority integration and citizenship expansion.
Observations from the Mao and Komo groups in western Ethiopia  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 173

I n halt

Sayuri Yoshida: From social differentiation to discrimination. Changes in therelationship between the Kafa and the Manjo of southwestern Ethiopia .  .  .  .  .  . 193
Kirsi Leikola: Talking Manjo. Manipulating a social boundary
through new linguistic resources  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 219
Eike Haberland: On the problems of hunters and special castes
in Northeast and East Africa .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 241
III. ANNEXE S

Glossary of terms in Ethiopian languages .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 269
List of contributors  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 275
Index of persons .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 279

Ack nowledgeme n ts

This volume is the result of a panel co-organized with Fabienne Braukmann for the 19thInternational Conference of Ethiopian Studies (ICES) in Warsaw in 2015. The idea wasto bring together some of the scattered recent research on the contemporary situationof craftworkers, hunters and slave descendants in Ethiopia. We were inspired by ourown work for a language documentation project, during which we had been confronted
with the complex and changing relationship between the hippo-hunting Haro and theagro-pastoralist Bayso people.1 My supervision of the research of several BA, MA and
PhD students on related topics during my time as Assistant Professor at Addis Ababa
University (2007–2015) likewise motivated me to dig deeper into the topic.
I would like to take the opportunity to thank Fabienne Braukmann for being
such a cooperative and helpful colleague throughout our research project and while
co-organizing the panel. Thanks too to all the authors for their excellent contributions
to this book. The German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) generously granted mea returnee grant, which gave me time to work on the manuscript. I am grateful to the
Frobenius Institute for financing the publication of the book and for accepting it in theirseries. Thanks also go to Dena Freeman, Roland Hardenberg, Holger Jebens, Richard
Kuba, Sophia Thubauville and Gebre Yntiso for their valuable comments on the manuscript, and last but not least to Kay Celtel for her fast and professional copy-editing.

1“Documentation of Bayso (Cushitic) and Haro (Omotic): Two endangered Afro-Asiatic languages of
Lake Abbaya in the Ethiopian Rift Valley” (see http://dobes.mpi.nl).

Foreword

Dena Freeman

I am delighted to have been asked to write a foreword for this book about status groups
in Ethiopia. The existence of marginalized minority groups in Ethiopia has puzzled
scholars for decades. From the early ethnological work of Haberland in the 1950s
and 60s, through the collection that Alula Pankhurst and I put together in the early
2000s, to today, anthropologists and historians have struggled to explain the situationof groups of hunters, craftworkers and former slaves – hereditary occupational groups
who live on the margins of larger groups of farmers or herders. This exciting bookshowcases a new generation of research on these groups and breaks new theoreticaland ethnographic ground.
Ethnographically, it offers new research on a number of little known groups, suchas the Bayso and Haro who, until recently, lived on Gidiccho island in the middle of
Lake Abbaya; the Mao and the Komo who live dispersed in Ethiopia’s western fringes
and over the border in Sudan; and the Kumpal-Agaw, a small group who live in northwest Ethiopia.
Whilst much of the previous work on marginalized groups – or status groups as
the authors in this volume prefer – focused on craftworkers, this book significantly
broadens the scope and includes studies of hunters, slave descendants and small ethnic
splinter groups. Many of the chapters also take an in-depth historical approach andshow how the situations of these groups have changed over time. In the process, theyshow the interconnections between these different categories and in fact destabilize andproblematize some of these categories, which previous, more synchronic, studies hadtaken as fixed. Thus we see cases of hunters being captured and sold as slaves, of small
ethnic groups being subsumed as status groups, and of former hunting groups effectively merging with farming groups. This shows how these should not be seen as separate
and distinct categories but as changing identities within shifting historical processes.
Many of the chapters emphasize how the relations between different groups areshaped by the political and economic exigencies of the time. Thus, in many cases, earlier more reciprocal patron-client relationships became transformed into relationshipsof domination and exploitation when the Abyssinian empire in the north developed ademand for slaves that led larger agricultural groups in the south to start raiding neighbouring smaller ethnic groups – often hunters – to sell as slaves. Descendants of such
slaves, now living in parts of northern Ethiopia, have to this day found it impossible

10

to integrate, and many have moved to towns in an attempt to escape their hereditary
identity.
The main focus of the book is on how well these various status groups are able tointegrate into broader society. The first section gives relative success stories, while thesecond section highlights cases of on-going resistance and tension. Many of the chapterslook at the role of contemporary state policies in this process and show that the ethnic
federalism approach is, in many cases, making the situation of these minorities moredifficult. The notion of a polity built up of essentialized, distinct and separate ethnic
groups leaves no room for these minorities who often seem to be both part of, and yet
distinct from, various groups. In some cases, they have succeeded in gaining political
recognition in the form of their own ‘special woreda’ but in most cases, they remain
politically invisible. The quest for rights and citizenship is not the same as the quest for
integration, and yet in contemporary Ethiopia the two often become blurred, with various consequences. Thus, in their quest for equal rights, members of status groups often
find themselves pulled in one of two uncomfortable directions – either getting equal
rights through merging with the larger ethnic group but in the process losing their own
cultural identity (e.g. Haro), or finding themselves in endless conflict when seeking togain rights whilst retaining their distinct cultural identity and practices (e.g. Manjo).
One of the highlights of this book is the way in which it focuses on the membersof the status groups themselves. We hear their voices and get a peek into the daily struggles of their lives. We also see some of the subaltern strategies that members of thesegroups have used, and are using, in order to improve their situation and to negotiate therelations between them and the majority group amongst whom they live. They draw on
available social, cultural and political resources in order to challenge their dominationand to move towards equality. In the contemporary period this includes converting toProtestant or Orthodox Christianity, calling for their own ‘special woredas’, and in somecases drawing on human rights norms developed by the United Nations. In most cases
the dominant groups resist the actions of the minorities and the chapters shine a lighton the dynamic power struggles that continue to take place.
This excellent collection takes forward the study of status groups by placing it in
the political context in which it belongs. It will be of great interest to those working in
the Ethiopian context and beyond.

i n troduction

Susanne Epple

Earlier literature on Ethiopian occupational and descent-based status groups described
their origin, history and livelihood as well as the scope and nature of marginalization.
More recently, researchers have begun to look at the flexibility of social categories andthe redefinition of social boundaries between dominant herders and farmers and submissive craft workers, hunters and slave descendants. However, detailed studies on thetransformation of hereditary status groups and their relationships with dominant sections of the society, and on the underlying internal and external factors for change, havebeen insufficient and scattered, both in their thematic and regional coverage. This volume relates to, and brings together, some of the most recent research looking at current
developments and changes in the relationship between various status groups and thelarger society in Ethiopia.
The low status of certain occupational and hereditary status groups is a worldwide
phenomenon and is still common, especially in South Asia and many parts of Africa. According to some estimates, there are more than 260 million people in the world who are
excluded on the basis of their descent or occupation (Pinto 2001:2817, Human Rights
Watch 2001). Most of them are part of the Indian Dalit caste (often called ‘the untouchables’), but similar forms of social differentiation and discrimination are found in other
Asian countries (Nepal, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Japan), in Africa (Burkina
Faso, Mali, Cameroon, Mauritania, Nigeria, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Ivory Coast, Gambia, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Burundi, Mauritius, Senegal) and in a few other places (Human Rights Watch 2001). In some countries, for example India and Nigeria, membersof such groups have recently begun to form activist groups and – often with the supportof NGOs and the media – to gain national and international attention.1
The scope, underlying causes, local explanations and justifications for the social
exclusion of such groups have raised the interest of scholars from history, social anthropology, political science, law and human rights. In the last two decades, people’s lived
experiences and the dynamics around allegedly static and impermeable boundaries between marginalized and dominant groups have also become a topic of interest.

1

See for example, the Asia Dalit Forum, an activist group fighting for equal treatment and chances
for the Indian Dalits and similar groups in other countries (http://asiadalitrightsforum.org/interventions.php).

12

Susanne Epple

This book builds on the work of researchers who have written on such groups inEthiopia, where social differentiation based on occupation and descent is common in
many ethnic groups, and has been well described in numerous studies (for an overview
see Freeman and Pankhurst 2001, Epple this volume). Many efforts have been madeby the present and previous governments to establish equality between all Ethiopian
societies and subgroups. And today national and international NGOs and churches areactive in raising awareness of the issue of inequality (Freeman and Pankhurst 2001).2
Yet, as many studies have shown, marginalization continues to exist. Some authors haveeven reported that, due to the high value given to ethnic identity in the context of ethnic federalism, local values and cultural practices – including the marginalization ofcraft workers, hunters and slave descendants (Aalen 2011, 2012; Tronvoll and Hagmann2012) – have been revitalized. The contributions in this volume focus particularly onchange, by exploring the contexts and causes that have allowed social boundaries to bealtered, manipulated or crossed. Some also identify specific factors that have prevented
such changes from happening.
Most of the chapters in this volume came out of an interdisciplinary panel entitled‘From periphery to mainstream? Recent observations on status changes of so-called
marginalized groups in Ethiopia’, which I co-organized for the 19th International Conference of Ethiopian Studies (ICES) held in Warsaw/Poland in August 2015.3 Some other chapters were included later by request. The studies cover different parts of Ethiopia
and show a range of circumstances as well as internal and external efforts to integrate
marginalized groups into more dominant sections of the society. The results show thatcertain status groups in Ethiopia have experienced favourable change due to religious
conversion; education; cultural contact; and changes in the political, economic and socio-cultural environment. Examples of integration have been observed in the culturaland linguistic adaptation of minorities to the majorities, the elimination of former prohibitions of close contact, and the development of innovative economic cooperation.
Among the difficulties around and obstacles to integration are the continuation or revitalization of cultural stereotypes from both dominant and dominated sections of society, and the indirect reinforcement of marginalization through preferential treatment of
the dominant sections of society in urban contexts (in education, employment, politicalparticipation etc.).

2

3

See for example the work of the Ethiopian NGO KMG (Kembatti Mentti Gezzima Tope) Ethiopia in
Kambata, which fights for gender equality, an end to female genital mutilation and the empowermentof the locally marginalized fuga, craftworkers (http://kmgethiopia.org). The Ethiopian Evangelical
Church Mekane Yesus (EECMY) is also addressing the issue through organizing ‘Minority Forums’
where groups who consider themselves as marginalized (most of them are considered as ‘pollutive’ by
the surrounding groups) and have problems in inclusion discuss, together with some prepresentativesof the dominant groups, their plights. Many of them are craftworkers, but also slave decendants andhunters are coming from different parts of the country (oral information, Leikola, this volume).
I co-organized the panel with Fabienne Braukmann.

i n troductio n

13

C ontested concepts :C astes , marginalized and sociall y excluded groups

Social differentiation and the exclusion of certain categories of people from mainstream
society exist in all parts of the world, in developed and developing countries, in stratified and more egalitarian societies, and in rural and urban contexts. However, thecauses, dimensions and faces of this differentiation differ from place to place, ranging
from avoidance and prohibition of commensality and intermarriage, to disadvantaged
access of certain status groups to resources and public participation, to very expressive
forms of dominance by the farming majorities towards occupational groups and slave
descendants, such as public insults, physical violence and other forms of disgracefultreatment when dominant and marginalized groups meet.
While efforts to use accurate terminology in the academic context have led to theabandonment – or, at least, use only in specific contexts – of imprecise terms, in the
non-academic discourse they continue to be used and instrumentalized, apparently toemphasize discriminatory practices. In the following, the most commonly used terms inacademic and non-academic discourse will briefly be presented.
In academia
Although Asia is probably home to the highest number of people marginalized becauseof their descent or occupation, the social exclusion of craftworkers, hunters and slave
descendants is also widespread in Africa, and is well known in the literature.4 In theacademic literature, among the most commonly used terms for certain status groups are‘caste’ or ‘avoided caste’, ‘pariah’, ‘outcast’, ‘marginalized or socially excluded groups’and ‘depressed classes’. Among some scholars doing research in Africa, the debate on
the right terminology has focused on two main questions: (1) whether occupational anddescent-based status groups in Africa can be compared with the Indian caste system;and (2) whether the expression ‘marginalized group’ is appropriate to generalize theAfrican context, as there exist many examples of ambiguous and complementary relationships between allegedly dominant and subordinate sections of societies.
The term ‘pariah’ originally referred to the Paraiyan, a Tamil caste of low status
in southern India. The usage of the term was later extended to other low-status castes
in India and eventually to similar groups in other parts of the world. Max Weber, forexample, used it to describe the situation of European Jews and Gypsies in the Middle
Ages, who were specialized on work that was considered impure, did not share the4See, for example, Tamari (1991), who has looked at the origins of castes in West Africa; Dilley (2000),
who has worked on the Tukulor craftsmen in West Africa; Koter (2016), who has studied electionsin West Africa (especially Senegal) and the connection to ethnic politics and caste organization; andRegnier (2012), who has investigated the difficult situation of contemporary slave descendants in
Madagascar.

14

Susanne Epple

local rights, were usually kept at a distance, and were not allowed to intermarry withthe local population (Weber 1921, in Amborn 1990:289). The anthropologist Wilhelm
Emil Mühlmann (1961, 1964, in Amborn 1990:290) extended Weber’s use of the term‘pariah’ to incorporate ‘despised professional castes’ and postulated the existence of acaste belt reaching from Bengal Iran and the Arab countries to West Africa (in Amborn
1990:290).
Many scholars writing on Africa used the term ‘caste’ to describe strata in Africa(Nadel 1954, Tuden and Plotnicov 1970:15–18, Maquet 1970), while those writing on
India (such as Leach 1960, Dumont 1980) insisted that the term ‘caste’ should only be
used in the context of Hindu ideology (Todd 1977:398). In his article ‘Caste in Africa?’– based on his own research among the Dime people in southern Ethiopia – David
Todd (1977:401) suggested a definition of ‘caste’ that allowed cross-cultural comparison.
While previous authors had used it for occupational groups within the same society
separated by certain alleged characteristics, Todd argued that the ‘all-embracing division of labor’ should be locally believed to be ‘divinely approved, and protected bypollution concepts and practices’. As such, in his view, the Dime and Dizi of southern
Ethiopia, who had several hierarchically ordered categories, were caste societies; whileothers, such as the Konso or Gurage, who distinguished only between farmers and craft
workers, were not.
When Alula Pankhurst (1999) re-discussed the issue some twenty years later, heargued that the term ‘caste’ did not depict the African situation properly. Outside India,
he said, the social differentiation lacked a ‘uniform cultural ideological underpinning’(Pankhurst 1999:503), meaning that there was no coherent religious ideology or philosophy serving as the ideological foundation for the subordinate status of occupationaland descent-based groups. In addition, he believed that the origins and histories of thenumerous ethnic groups in Ethiopia, as well as the relationships between dominant
and marginalized sections, were too diverse, unstructured and dynamic to allow comparison with the Indian castes.5 Thus, he and others considered the parallels drawn

5

Pankhurst (1999:487–495) listed three main objections to the use of the term ‘caste’ in the African
context: (1) ideological objections, the lack of coherent religious sanctions or philosophies for a hierarchy of occupational groups and the variation in status of specific occupational groups from place toplace and their often ambiguous or even ‘dual’ status within society; (2) genetic objections, relating
to the different models as to how the social differentiation may have come to exist, which range fromhunters being ‘remnants of earlier groups’, to craftworkers being migrants settling as ‘guests’ in places
where their knowledge was needed, to social division of labour that led to ‘internal specialization’ anddifferent categories of people; and (3) structural objections, where authors objected to the use of theterm ‘caste’ in the African context as it is used only for the minorities, but not for the whole society,since relations between dominant and marginalized are mostly reflected in individual patron–client
relationships rather than in general exploitation of one group by the other because there exists noclear ranking of marginalized groups (Pankhurst 1999:495). None of these models can satisfactorily
be applied to all Ethiopian societies and they are also not mutually exclusive.

int roduct ion

15

between the African context and the Indian caste system as exaggerated and, therefore,
misleading (Amborn 1990, Pankhurst 1999).
While the term ‘caste’ has lost prominence in the academic literature on Africa,‘marginalized’ and ‘disadvantaged groups’ are commonly used, often as synonyms for‘socially excluded’. French sociologists developed the concept of ‘social exclusion’ in the
1970s to describe economically disadvantaged people. The expression ‘the excluded’
was introduced to refer to a variety of disabled and destitute groups (Silver 1995 in Allman 2013:2). The European community used the term ‘social exclusion’ for the first timeat the end of the 1980s as part of a policy response to economic marginalization (Wilson
2006 in Allman 2013:7) and, since then, the concept has been used to describe economic
conditions, including unemployment and poverty. Political scientists and economists
understood the term primarily in its economic sense, that is, that individuals can be
excluded from participation in mainstream life due to economic disability and lackof access to resources. Sociologists, however, included in their understanding identity-based forms of exclusion, that is, where a bounded group of people (specific ethnicity
or origin, castes, religious groups) is defined as different and often inferior on the basisof their cultural practices and shared way of life. Although such groups are often also
economically disadvantaged, in principle they cut across economically defined strata ofa given society (Thakur 2012).
These terms have also been criticized for generalizing the marginalization of occupational and decent-based status groups in a way that does not always reflect reality.
Amborn (1990 and this volume) has argued that the term ‘marginalized’ does not properly characterize the situation of many Ethiopian occupational groups, as they usuallyconstitute a highly necessary segment of societies. This, so he argues, is very different tothe socially deprived groups such as unemployed or homeless people to which the term
‘marginalized’ originally referred.
To avoid false generalization, some authors have opted for more neutral terms,
such as ‘occupational groups’ for craftworkers and certain musicians and, more generally, ‘status groups’ (Amborn 1990) or ‘hereditary status groups’ (Ellison 2006) for all
kinds of descent-based status groups. In this volume, the terms ‘occupational groups’,‘descent-based groups’ and ‘hereditary status group’ are preferred. The first term hints
at the fact that identity is linked to profession, while the latter two indicate that social
status is passed on to the next generation, and both do not automatically infer that suchgroups are marginalized and disadvantaged, thus leaving open the possibility of their
being venerated or considered as equals. The terms ‘marginalized’ or ‘disadvantaged’group are used in contexts where marginalization has indeed been observed.

16

Susanne Epple

Non-academic context
In international non-academic literature, the terms ‘caste’ and ‘marginalized groups’
are widely used, and the Indian case often equated with the African and other contexts. Indeed, a United Nations expert on minority issues once spoke of ‘dehumanizing
discrimination based on caste and similar systems of inherited status’ in Asia, Africa,
Middle East, the Pacific region and in the diaspora’.6 Human Rights Watch (2001) has
discussed the cases of ‘caste societies’ in Asia and Africa, indicating that they all facesimilar restrictions7, which are – like the Indian castes – based on a differentiation ofhumans into separate categories based on concepts of purity and impurity.8
The Asia Dalit Forum has argued that caste could even be considered a kind of
race. Their view was supported by the Indian political scientist Ambrose Pinto (2001),
who stated that the Dalits’ status in the Indian society is affected by a kind of racism, arguing that – in the case of both caste and race – status is ascribed at birth and transmitted over generations, which leads to prejudice and discrimination not only at a personal
but also institutional level (Pinto 2001). By equalling caste and race, the Dalits aimed
to highlight their status, as well as that of similar groups affected by discrimination
based on descent and occupation, and make it one of the key topics during the UN’s
second World Conference against Racism held in Durban in 2001. In August 2002 theUN committee on the elimination of racial discrimination (CERD) strongly condemned
caste practice and analogous systems of inherited status, as they violate the International
Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination. On this occasion,
people from different countries presented the situation of groups discriminated againston the basis of descent in India, Japan, Nigeria, Senegal, Niger, Somalia, Kenya (Pinto
2002:3899). The EU has also spoken of ‘caste-based discrimination’ and has outlined its
strategies for alleviating the issue (European Parliament 2013).9The term ‘marginalized group’ is used by the UN Human Rights Office of theHigh Commissioner for ‘persons with disabilities, youth, women, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex people, members of minority groups, indigenous people,
6
7

8
9

UN News Center (http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=53511#.WaRHYJHg3wJ).
These include: (1) marriage – prohibition from marrying someone from a higher caste; (2) free choiceof labour – duty to stick to culturally assigned occupations, which are often considered as ‘filthy’ or‘polluting’ for higher castes; (3) access to land – often landless and forced to work as low-paid labourers for higher castes) (4) political representation and political rights, e.g. usually not represented innational or regional governments. It is also shown that these disadvantages commonly hinder suchgroups’ efforts to actively change their life conditions, as they endure: (1) physical and economic
retaliation when they refuse to accept their role or join activist groups; (2) multiple types of discrimination against women of low castes; (3) continued discrimination abroad, where structures are often
replicated; (4) continued discrimination and disadvantage through the legacies of slavery – in someplaces as bonded labour, in others discrimination of slave descendants.
http://idsn.org/wp-content/uploads/user_folder/pdf/Old_files/africa/pdf/Africafull.pdf.
http://w w w.europarl.europa.eu/ RegData/etudes/note/join/2013/433805/EX PO-DEVE _NT(2013)433805_EN.pdf.

int roduct ion

17internally displaced persons, and non-national, including refugees, asylum seekers andmigrant workers’.10 As this definition does not clearly encompass the situation of members of castes, descendants of slaves or occupational groups, it has been strongly criticized by the Asia Dalit Forum. It has demanded that the situation of castes and similarly
discriminated groups in other countries be specifically acknowledged as a ‘determinantof poverty and under-development’ and has made efforts – albeit unsuccessful – to havethe plight of these people included in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
Goals. The Dalit Forum has remained strongly critical of Agenda since failing to haveits demands met.11

H andling difference :R esistance , compliance and strategic handling of identit yGroup identity is based on the perceived or claimed shared characteristics – such as
race, language, religion, historical experience, territory, amongst others – of the wegroup, which thereby create difference to others (Donahoe et al. 2009). It has beenshown in the vast literature on ethnicity, identity and identity politics that social boundaries between different categories of people are flexible: they can be overcome, changed,
blurred, manipulated and given up altogether12 and individuals can be included andexcluded according to the group’s interests (Barth 1969:9–10).
The strategies employed in ethnic boundary making and shifting can also be seenamong social categories such as occupational groups, castes, slaves/slave descendants
and others. Their situation has often been presented as rather static and difficult toovercome, as distinctions between them and the dominant majority are usually locallyjustified by their alleged impurity. Yet, there are dynamics at work around these boundaries, and these – although mentioned here and there – have only recently gained more
attention from researchers and from activists looking for ways to address the matter.
ResistanceSome cases of public resistance have gained public and even international recognition
as they involved open protest, recourse to national or international NGOs’ courts, andthe media. We have seen already how the Indian Dalits formed a movement to represent
not only their own but also other marginalized groups’ interests at levels reaching as
high as the United Nations. Similarly, the ‘low caste’ Nigerian Osu people have taken
their case to the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights with the help of
10
11
12

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=14690&LangID=E.
http://asiadalitrightsforum.org/interventions.php.
Cohen 1978, Schlee 2004, 2008, Elwert 2002, Wimmer 2008, Donahoe et al. 2009.

18

Susanne Epple

an international NGO called the International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU),
demanding that the African Commission adopts a resolution condemning caste-based
discrimination and to urge Nigeria and other states to take measures to eradicate allforms of discrimination against lower caste people’.13
Some NGOs are attempting to practically improve the lives of disadvantaged
groups through direct (often financial) support, in the hope that this will increase theirsocial recognition at the same time. KMG-International, an Ethiopian NGO, is currently hoping to upgrade the status of craftworkers in Kambata by providing training toartisans, promoting their products, and attempting to change existing stereotypes about
them into positive ones through awareness raising.14 And certain organizations in Sudan
provide financial support to buy out and free slaves and redeem slave descendants fromtheir alleged unclean status.15
Besides open resistance and these visible efforts to change existing categories,
there exist everyday and hidden forms of resistance, a kind of covert form of ‘ideological resistance’, which can include ‘foot-dragging, evasion, false compliance, pilfering,
feigned ignorance, slander and sabotage’ (Scott 1985). Such acts are used by powerless
individuals and groups for whom direct confrontation and a challenging of elite norms
could be disadvantageous or even dangerous. While his own research was on peasants in Malaysia, Scott (1990:104) suggested that the concepts of ‘public and hidden
transcripts’ could also be useful in analysing the lives of people in Indian castes andthose living under similar forms of domination. In applying Scott’s concepts, Regnier (2012:30) found that slave descendants in Madagascar manipulate the social systemby ‘establishing (fictive) kinship links with free descent families’. These ‘rewritings’ or‘inventions’ of kinship, the author argues, constitute a means of resistance, which showthat the Berosaiña have not internalized their ‘slave status’, but actively attempt to resist
prejudice and discrimination without openly resisting. The case of the Manjo huntersof southern Ethiopia provides an example of both public and hidden resistance as theyboth demonstrate and fight for equal rights in the court (Yoshida, 2013, this volume)and use Kaffa language manipulatively (Leikola, this volume) to either identify themselves with the dominant Kaffa or be acknowledged as an independent marginalizedgroup.

13
14
15

Source: http://iheu.org/caste-discrimination-africa-iheu-speaks-out-african-human-rights-commission.
See www.http://kmgethiopia.org.
Their work has been criticized by some who argue that slave redemption in Sudan has actually increased the profitability of slave raids (Miniter1999, 2004). Other authors argue, however, that it is the
only way to free at least some individuals from a system of suppression (Arrowsmith 2004).

int roduct ion

19

Compliance
Social differentiation is often deeply entrenched in culture and legitimized throughmyths or religious values and ideas. Thus, while it is usually upheld by the dominantsections of a society, it may be supported by all members of that society, both dominantand discriminated against.
For this reason, Pelzer-White (1986:55–56) has argued that, alongside studying
inventories of ‘everyday forms of resistance’, one should not ignore the ‘everyday formsof peasant collaboration’ between dominated and dominant groups. She suggests thatcollaboration is prevalent most of the time, as peasant majorities need the dominatedpeople’s compliance with the system in order to stay in power, no matter how oppressive
and exploitative they are. The tricks dominated groups might use to cheat their superiors (she gives the example of adding stones or straw to their harvest in order to increase
the weight and, thereby, the share due to the landlord or tax collector) may psychologically satisfy the powerless by giving them the illusion of having some share in power.
Therefore, she argues, such acts – if discovered – may be interpreted as ‘rebellious’ by
the powerful, but are meant as simple means of having greater economic gain by thepowerless through cheating.
Some studies have shown that certain status groups may actively hold on to andeven emphasize social differentiation in order to achieve a specific goal. Beall (2002) has
demonstrated how a low-caste occupational group of waste workers in Punjab, Pakistan
used its identity-based social exclusion to secure its livelihood. Despite their conversion
to Christianity, they had continued to be labelled with the same stereotype of alleged
ritual pollutedness, which had given them the exclusive right to remove solid and liquid
waste. When they were threatened with the loss of their livelihood by the introductionof service firms for waste removal, they began actively protecting their label. In orderto protect their source of income, they argued that their own impurity meant that they
were they the only ones entitled to do this dirty job (Beall 2002:45–46).
Höhne (2014) gives the example of minorities (occupational groups and others)
in Somalia, which – due to the civil war in Somalia – instead of striving to be included
into the mainstream society, began demanding to be recognized as ethnically different.
In their case, this was driven partly by an intention to receive preferential treatment as
refugees abroad. The Waata hunters of northern Kenya likewise are emphasizing theirown ethnic identity with the aim of using their independent ethnicity to gain politicalrights and participation (Aneesa and Bashuna 2004).
As the case of the Kumpal-Agaw of northern Ethiopia shows, among some groups,
the members’ internalization of their inferior status can be so strong that they maintainit out of cultural conviction. According to Desalegn (this volume), the Kumpal-Agaw
uphold the ancestral curse responsible for their alleged inferiority. The continued feeling of guilt for their ancestors’ failure to behave loyally to another section of their soci-20

Susanne Epple

ety has rendered them unable to change their low self-image and overcome their marginalized position.

H ereditar y status groups in ethiopia

Hereditary status groups are found in many Ethiopian societies, whether stratified ormore egalitarian. They constitute either subsections of a given society or separate small
groups that live close to, or in association with, majority groups. The dominated groups
or subgroups include artisans/craftworkers (potters, tanners, blacksmiths, weavers,
woodworkers, etc.), certain musicians, hunters and descendants of hunters, descendants
of slaves, special clans or small splinters of ethnic groups living dispersed among others.
The dominant majority usually consists of farmers and, in some cases, agro-pastoralists.
Most of these hereditary status groups are widely perceived as being fundamentally different from the majority groups. They are separated from each other by clearly definedsocial boundaries, and interaction with each other is usually limited and regulated.16
Among the negative characteristics attributed by the majority groups to hunters,
craftworkers and slave descendants are ritual impurity (often related to their work, thematerials they work with, and/or the consumption of unclean food), as well as unsocialand disloyal character and/or behaviour. Slave descendants are in many places perceived
as racially different, unclean and polluting, and not fully human.17 Some marginalizedgroups are believed to be cursed, as is the case for the lalibela singers in Amhara region
16

17

Among the detailed earlier works on hereditary status groups in Ethiopia are publications of the
Frobenius Institute, such as the volumes by Ad. E. Jensen (1936, 1959), Helmut Straube (1963) andEike Haberland (1963) on the expeditions to southern Ethiopia in 1934–35, 1950–52 and 1954–56.
Haberland in particular was interested in the topic of status groups and published several articles andbooks on the status of craftworkers, hunters and slaves and the connection between sacred kingdoms
and special castes (Haberland 1961, 1962, 1964, 1972, 1979, 1984, 1992, 1993). His student Werner
Lange went on to write about divine kingship and the special position of bards in Kaffa (Lange 1976,
1979/80). The 1950s, 1960s and 1970s also brought monographs and articles by international scholars
writing on various ethnic groups with marginalized subgroups. Among these were the fuga minority,a group of former hunters currently engaged in craftwork, living with the Gurage and some otherpeople (Shack 1964, 1966; Teclehaimanot 2003); the hauda (also xawda, xauda) craftworkers among
the Konso people (Hallpike 1968, 1972); the Manjo hunters among the Kaffa people (Huntingford
1955); and the Ethiopian Jewish Beta Israel community, living among the Amhara and Tigray (Quirin
1977, 1979).
Many slaves in the north originally came from the west or south of the country and had much darker
skin than their owners. Quite differently, in southern Ethiopia, most slaves originally came from thesame or adjacent areas as their owners. Therefore, in some cases the only difference between themand the freeborn was their slave status, and neither cultural nor racial distinctions played a role(see, for example, the case of the Ganta, Bosha, this volume). The impure and inferior status of slave
descendants is then explained by their alleged loss of proper humanity at the moment their ancestors turned into slaves. In some places, redemption to full human status could be achieved throughcertain rituals (on Ganta see Bosha, 2013 and this volume) or through the extraordinary merits ofindividual slaves for their masters (on Hadiyya see Braukämper (2014:80).

int roduct ion

21(Kawase 20014:185), or by parts of their own society, like the Kumpal-Agaw (Desalegn,
this volume).
Certain status groups, however, occupy an ambiguous position with both positive
and negative attributes ascribed to them. The positive attributes assigned to hunters/
descendants of hunters and craftworkers in many places include special powers andabilities to bless, curse, heal and mediate. In the past, hunters were often believed to
be close to the sacred kings and/or the creator, and in many societies, they acted as
guards and servants of kings, performed the burial services for kings and participatedin the coronation of new ones. They were often responsible for actions that were considered unclean, for example, undertaking executions for the king (Haberland 1964).
Craftworkers also played an important role as ritual assistants during initiations, and as
birth attendants, circumcisers, musicians, conveyers of news and morticians (Pankhurst
2001:2). Moreover, craftworkers’ products were economically indispensable in the mostly agrarian or agro-pastoral communities around and among which they lived. Slaves
used to fulfil important economic needs in societies with intensive agriculture, where
the majority of males were engaged in warfare (for example in Wolayta, Haberland
1993), but slave descendants seem to lack any kind of ritual or social responsibility.
Pankhurst (2001:2–7) has identified five main domains of social marginalization
for craftworkers and hunters: spatial, economic, political, social and cultural. Spatialrefers to the fact that many craftworkers or hunters live outside or at the edges the farmers’ villages, often close to the forest/bush or in infertile places. Economic exclusion
arises from their lack of access to certain resources, such as land, animals, and their confinement to certain activities, such as the production of certain products. Often forced
to sell their products for a low price, traditionally many are poor. Politically, members of
low status groups have been denied access to political office, prevented from expressing
their views and denied any active participation in public decision-making. Social exclusion entails the daily avoidance of members of certain status groups by the membersof the mainstream farming or herding community. Many farmers and herders today
continue to refuse to eat or drink or share plates or cups with them, and – in extreme
cases – even avoid touching the people themselves. They expect to be greeted in very
submissive ways (bending down leaving the road, expressing low status verbally) and,
where social relations exist, these are usually non-reciprocal. In almost all cases, intermarriage is strictly forbidden. Culturally, marginalization is expressed through oral
history, myths of origins and proverbs and stories that express and justify one group’s
subordinate position. Although Pankhurst only looks at craftworkers and hunters, thesame domains of marginalization seem to be applicable to slave descendants18 and marginalized splinter groups (Desalegn, this volume; Meckelburg, this volume).
In Ethiopia, as elsewhere, many of the efforts made by external agents to alter
the status and lives of occupational and decent-based groups have not been successful,18

Haberland 1992, Aalen 2011, Bosha 2013, Kiya, this volume.

22

Susanne Epple

or their successes have not been sustainable. Yet, there are examples of individuals orgroups who have tried and succeeded to overcome social boundaries through different
internal and external mechanisms: cultural adaptation, external support, economic success, maintaining distance from the dominant group, redefinition of their own status(Epple 2017 and this volume).

O rganization of the b oo k

The first chapter gives an overview of the most recent literature on occupational andhereditary groups in Ethiopia. Chapters 2 to 11 are based on original and recent fieldwork and give insights into the present situation of allegedly marginalized status groups.
Two of these works (by Bosha and Kiya) deal with the contemporary situation of slave
descendants. Five chapters (by Epple/Braukmann, Savà, Yoshida, Leikola and Samuel)look at the contemporary situation of hunters or descendants of hunters, both from ananthropological and a linguistic perspective. One chapter examines the experiences ofcraftworkers in southern Ethiopia (Amborn) and two authos look at the marginalization of small ethnic splinter groups (Desalegn, Meckelburg). Chapter 12 is a translated
reprint of an article published by Eike Haberland in German in 1962, in which he gives
his view on ‘hunters’ and ‘special castes’ in Ethiopia.
In Chapter 1, Susanne Epple gives an analytical overview of the recent research on
Ethiopian occupational and descent-based groups, focusing on the contexts and specificcircumstances that have caused change. The literature shows that social boundaries between various status groups have been modified, redefined or blurred through factors
and forces that come both from outside and within the groups themselves. Here, certain
factors seem to be more effective and sustainable than others. The paper ends with alook at gaps in the literature and suggestions for future research.
Samuel Tibebe writes in Chapter 2 on the limits and chances for integration
through religious conversion of the Manja living in Dawro, southern Ethiopia. The
rather recently introduced Protestant Christianity propagates equality and brotherhoodand, as such, gives hope to the Manja – a group of former hunters comprising the lowest
stratum of Dawro society, looking to gain more acceptance and be better integrated. As
his research shows, churches serve as platforms for newly defined encounters between
Manja and the farmers (malla), and there is a general trend toward the dominance of theDawro being less obviously demonstrated and the Manja showing less submissive behaviour. However, the effect of Protestant Christianity is not the same all over Dawro.
While in some areas the Manja and the dominant malla visit the same churches and are
members of the same savings organizations, in other areas the malla have resisted sharing the church with the Manja and ideas of their inferiority and impurity persist. Wherea certain level of integration has been achieved, it has led to an economic disadvantage

i n troductio n

23

because, in places where Manja are allowed to participate in malla work parties, themalla do not reciprocate the labour.
Chapter 3 is devoted to Bosha Bombe’s description of the contemporary situationof slave descendants in Ganta. He elaborates the continuance of slave status even after
the abolition of slavery in the 1940s. Since then, the ayle (slave descendants) – mostof whom are from Ganta and not outside – have continued to experience discrimination and exclusion from mainstream life. Ganta society has developed a mechanism forreinstalling full human status to the ayle. As this mechanism is extremely costly, thegovernment, churches and church-based NGOs have recently become active in trying
to eliminate the institution of the ayle altogether. Bosha describes the various internaland external efforts made and critically analyses their successes, setbacks and overallsustainability.
In chapter 4, Susanne Epple and Fabienne Braukmann examine the unequal yet
dynamic relationship between two small groups in the context of approaching modernity. The agricultural Bayso have played the dominant role in their relationship with the
hippo-hunting Haro, who they claim to have accepted as settlers on Gidiccho Islandaround 150 years ago. The Haro have made great efforts to adapt culturally and linguistically to the Bayso in order to decrease the social distance between them. In recent
times, the complete conversion of both groups to Orthodox and Protestant Christianity
and their economic cooperation in a fishing cooperative have brought the two groups
even closer together, so that today boundaries are blurred and even intermarriage –previously prohibited – has become common. Yet, integration has been at the cost of an
independent Haro identity, and the Haro are now not officially recognized as an independent group. Indeed, the Haro have not only adopted many Bayso cultural practices,
but even show a tendency to deny any earlier cultural difference.
In chapter 5, Graziano Savà gives an insight into the speech behaviours of several
Bayso and Haro people, comparing those living on the shores of Lake Abbaya, in close
distance from the district capital Mirab Abbaya town with those living on Gidiccho Island in the lake. Both groups have long been multilingual in the languages of the groups
surrounding them (e.g. Gamo, Gats’ame, Wolayta and Guji-Oromo), and Amharic has
recently been added to their linguistic repertoires. As the administrative language used
in town and the language used in schools, Amharic stands for modernity and progressand has become attractive, particularly to young people, and has entered people’s daily
discourses through code-switching and borrowing. Savà demonstrates and interprets
the differences between Bayso and Haro code-switching behaviour that emanate fromthe Bayso’s more intensive contact with the town through education and employment.
In Chapter 6, Hermann Amborn looks at the dynamic relationship between craftspeople and the majority farming community over the course of the last eighty years.
He argues that their relationship has always depended on the interplay between internal
development and external events, such as the prevailing social order, economic conditions and historical change. He stresses that in the south, their relationship can by no24

Susanne Epple

means be generalized as one of domination and marginalization. Rather, it should beconsidered as one of complementarity, as it is mostly based on social division of labourand concepts of discrimination and social hierarchy that were imported from the northof the country. He also argues that many scholars who did research in the south of
Ethiopia were highly influenced by previous research done in the north and therefore
exaggerated the dominance of the farming communities over craftworkers.
In the second part of the book, cases of persisting marginalization are explored.
Desalegn Amsalu looks in Chapter 7 at how marginalization is locally explained andsustained by a marginalized group itself. The Kumpal-Agaw of north-western Ethiopia are convinced, that their physical appearance and their failure to be successful inmodern education, political participation and economic development is a result of anancestral curse. As the author shows, although external forces and factors have strongly
contributed to the social marginalization of the Kumpal people, their belief in the ancestral curse has made them, and continues to make them, passive.
Chapter 8, written by Kiya Gezahegne, explores the history and contemporary
situation of the exclusively female slaves who constituted the bottom stratum of the hierarchical society of the Rayya Qobbo Amhara in north Wollo. The slaves in this area,
originally from the south or southwest of the country, were mainly used for physicallabour and strongly discriminated against by the rest of the society. After the abolitionof slavery, the descendants of the slaves have continued to be differentiated and many
have left the area to live in towns, where they can hide their identity.
Chapter 9 was contributed by Alexander Meckelburg, who examines the situationof the Mao and Komo people of western Ethiopia: two related groups who – for historical reasons – live spread over various districts and even regions as minorities among
other groups. As cross-border minorities in Sudan and Ethiopia, they have been affected by civil war, displacement and the slave trade and, thus, have been disadvantaged
and stigmatized in various ways. Today they continue to be discriminated against by thesurrounding groups. As small splinters, the Mao and Komo are not recognized as independent ethnic groups and therefore have no voice in the regional or national context.
An exception is the Mao people living in Benishangul/Gumuz, who were given a special
woreda. Nevertheless, they have not managed to achieve any remarkable social status
within the Ethiopian context. Meckelburg first discusses their complex history under
the last three political regimes in Ethiopia, and then reflects on their contemporary
situation as a scattered minority.
Sayuri Yoshida recapitulates the history of the Kaffa-Manjo relationship in Chapter 10. She elaborates how the position of the Manjo as a group of former hunters witha special role in the Kaffa kingdom changed into that of a socially discriminated group.
She traces the changes in the social organization of Kaffa society – and the effects ofthese changes on the status of the Manjo – from the forced inclusion of Kaffa in the
Ethiopian Empire at the end of the nineteenth century, through the Italian occupation and the regimes of Emperor Haile Selassie I, to the socialist Derg and the present

i n troductio n

25

EPRDF government. Despite many efforts to create a more equal relationship between
the Manjo and the Kaffa majority, the Manjo have so far not been empowered and theirsocial and political participation is marginal.
In Chapter 11, Kirsi Leikola shows how language can be used to influence social
status. While Manjo and Kaffa both speak kafi-noono, the Manjo claim that the variety
they speak is being stigmatized and therefore limiting their social chances. To counter
this, the Manjo are strategically entering into new social networks with the Kaffa majority and thereby gaining access to additional linguistic repertoires. They use theserepertoires for two different goals. Through imitating the Kaffa way of speaking theycreate a kind of sameness with the Kaffa that allows them to claim equal rights moreeasily. However, in contexts when they rely on the Manjo variety of kafi-noono, theyemphasize difference in order to support their endeavour to have their separate ethnic
identity acknowledged – a privilege so far denied to them in the context of ethnic federalism. Depending on the context of the speech situation, they will opt for one repertoireor the other, thereby manipulating their social boundary with the Kaffa according totheir own interests.
Chapter 12, a translation of an article published originally in German by Eike
Haberland in 1962 provides a detailed overview of the status groups existing in Ethiopia in the late 1950s, with a particular focus on ‘hunters’ and ‘special castes’ in all partsof the country (slave descendants are not mentioned). The chapter includes Haberland’sreview of the literature on their origins, history and various theories and explanations
for their special status and marginalization that existed when he was writing.

R eferences
A A LEN , Lovise

2011

The politics of ethnicity in Ethiopia: Actors, power and mobilization under ehnic federalism. Leiden: Brill
2012“Revival of tradition? The power of clans and social strata in the Wolayta elections”, in:Tobias Hagmann and Kjetil Tronvoll (eds.), Contested power: Traditional authorities andmultiparty elections in Ethiopia, 111–135. Leiden: Brill
A MBOR N , Herrmann
1990
Differenzierung und Integration: Vergleichende Untersuchungen zu Spezialisten und
Handwerkern in südäthiopischen Agrargesellschaften. München: Trickster
ANEESA Kassam and BASH UNA , Ali Balla
2004“Marginalization of the Waata Oromo hunter-gatherers of Kenya: Insider and outsider
perspectives”, Africa 74(2):194–216

26

Susanne Epple

A R ROWSMIT H , Martin“Slave redemption has a role in combating slavery in Sudan”, in: Auriana Ojeda (ed.),Slavery today, 45–48. San Diego et al.: Greenhaven Press
BA RT H , Fredrik ed.
1969
Ethnic groups and boundaries: The social organization of cultural difference. London: Allen and Unwin
BEA LL , Jo
“Globalization and social exclusion in cities: Framing the debate with lesson from Afri2002
ca and Asia”, Environment and Urbanization 14(1):41–51
BOSH A Bombe
2013
Social exclusion and integration in Ganta (Gamo) of southwestern Ethiopia: A study ofdescent-based slaves. Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa University (MA Thesis)
BR AUK Ä M PER , Ulrich
2014
A history of the Hadiyya in southern Ethiopia. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz
COHEN , Ronald
1978“Ethnicity: Problem and focus in Anthropology”, Annual Review of Anthropology
7:379–403
DILLEY, Roy M.
2000“The question of caste in West Africa with special reference to Tukulor craftsmen”,
Anthropos 95(1):149–165
DONA HOE , Brian et al.
2009“The formation and mobilization of collective identities in situations of conflict and integration”, Working paper Nr. 116. Halle: Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology
DUMONT, Louis1980
Homo hierarchicus: The caste system and its implications (revised edition). Chicago: University of Chicago Press
ELLISON , James
2006“Everyone can do as he wants: Economic liberalization and emergent forms of antipathy
in southern Ethiopia”, American Ethnologist 33(4):665–686
ELW ERT, Georg
2002“Switching identity discourses: Primordial emotions and the social construction of wegroups”, in: Günther Schlee (ed.), Imagined differences: Hatred and the construction ofidentity, 33–56. Hamburg: Lit
EPPLE , Susanne
2017“Definite segregation or permeable boundaries? Revisiting the Frobenius research on
artisans, hunters and slave descendants in Ethiopia”, in: Sabine Dinslage and Sophia
Thubauville (eds.), Seeking out wise old men, 89–108. Berlin: Reimer
F R EEM AN , Dena
2004
Initiating change in highland Ethiopia: Causes and consequences of cultural transformation.
Cambridge: Cambridge University PressF R EEM AN , Dena and Alula PANK H UR ST (eds.)
2001
Living on the edge: Marginalized minorities of craft workers and hunters in southern Ethiopia. Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa University Press
GEMEDA Hunde Wordoffa
2016
Documentation of the endangered cultural traits of the Waata community: Chopha village
in focus. Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa University (PhD Thesis)
2004

i n troductio n27

H A BER LAND , Eike

“Eisen und Schmiede in Nordostafrika. Beiträge zur Völkerforschung”, in: Dietrich
Drost und Wolfgang König (eds.), Hans Damm zum 65. Geburtstag. Veröffentlichungendes Museums für Völkerkunde zu Leipzig 1(1):191–210“Zum Problem der Jäger und besonderen Kasten in Nordost- und Ost-Afrika”, Paideu1962
ma 8:136–155
Die Galla Süd-Äthiopiens. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer
1963“König und Paria in Afrika”, in: Eike Haberland, Meinhard Schuster und Helmut
1964
Straube: Festschrift für Ad. E. Jensen, 155–166. München: Renner
1972“Sakralkönigtum in Äthiopien. Geschichte und Verfassungsgefüge”, in: Festgabe fürWalther Schlesinger, 250–265.Wiesbaden: Steiner“Special castes in Ethiopia”, in: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Ethio1979
pian Studies, 29–132. Chicago: University of Illinois
1984“Caste and hierarchy among the Dizi (southwest Ethiopia)”, in: Sven Rubenson (ed.),Proceedings of the 7th International Conference of Ethiopian Studies, Lund 1982, 447–450.
Addis Ababa and East Lansing
1992“Sklaverei im alten Wolayta”, Jahrbuch des Museums für Völkerkunde zu Leipzig 39:157–
173
1993
Hierarchie und Kaste: zur Geschichte und politischen Struktur der Dizi in Südwest-Äthiopien. Stuttgart: Steiner
H A LLPIK E , Christopher R.
1968“The status of craftsmen among the Konso of south-west Ethiopia”, Africa 38(3):258–
269
HÖHNE , Markus Virgil
2014“Continuities and changes regarding minorities in Somalia”, Ethnic and Racial Studies
38(5):792–807
1961

HUM AN R IGHTS WATCH

2001

Caste disrimination: A global concern. Report for the United Nations world conference against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. Durban,
South Africa, September 2001, 13(3) (G) (accessible online at https://www.hrw.org/reports/2001/globalcaste/caste0801.pdf.)
HUNTINGFOR D , George Wynn Brereton
1955
The Galla of Ethiopia: The kingdoms of Kafa and Janjero. London: International African
InstituteJENSEN , Adolf Ellegard
1936
Im Lande des Gada. Wanderungen zwischen Volkstrümmern Südabessiniens. Stuttgart:
Strecker & Schröder
JENSEN , Adolf Ellegard (ed.)
1959
Altvölker Süd-Äthiopiens. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer
K AWASE , Itsushi
2014“The Amharic oral poetry of the Lalibaelocc of northern Ethiopia”, Japanese Review ofCultural Anthropology 15:185–198
KOT ER , Dominika
2016
Beyond ethnic politics in Africa. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

28

Susanne Epple

LANGE , Werner Jürgen

“Dialectics of divine kingship in the Kafa highlands”, Occasional Papers, No. 15. African Studies Center, UCLA
1979/80 “Status and functions of Kafa bards in feudal Ethiopia”, Northeast African Studies 1:85–
90
LEACH , Edmund Ronald (ed.)
Aspects of caste in south India, Ceylon and north-west Pakistan. Cambridge: Cambridge
1960
University Press
M aquet, Jacques, J.
1970“Rwanda castes”, in: Arthur Tuden and Leonard Plotnicov (eds.), Social stratification in
Africa, 93–124. New York: Free Press; London: Collier-Macmillan
MINIT ER , Richard
1999“Encouraging the slave trade”, The Atlantic Monthly (accessible online at https://www.
theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/99jul/9907sudanslaves2.htm)
2004“Slave redemption increases slavery in Sudan”, in: Auriana Ojeda (ed.), Slavery Today,
49–59. San Diego et al.: Greenhaven Press
NA DEL , Siegfried Frederick
1954“Caste and government in primitive society”, Journal of the Anthropological Society of
Bombay 8(2):9–22
PANK H UR ST, Alula
1999“‘Caste’ in Africa: The evidence from south-western Ethiopia reconsidered”, Africa:
Journal of the International African Institute 69(4):485–509
2001“Introduction: dimensions and conceptions of marginalization”, in: Dena Freeman andAlula Pankhurst (eds.), Living on the edge: Marginalized minorities of craft workers andhunters in southern Ethiopia, 1–23. Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa University Press
PANK H UR ST, Alula and Dena F R EEM AN
2001“Conclusion II: Change and development: Lessons from the twentieth century”, in:
Dena Freeman and Alula Pankhurst (eds.), Living on the edge: Marginalized minorities
of craftworkers and hunters in southern Ethiopia, 331–375. Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa
University Press
PELZER-W HIT E , Christine
1986“Everyday resistance, socialist revolution and rural development: The Vietnamesecase”, The Journal of Peasant Studies 13(2):49–63
PINTO , Ambrose
2001“UN conference against racism: Is caste race?”, Economic and Political Weekly30(36):2817–2820
2002“Caste discrimination and UN”, Economic and Political Weekly: 37(39), 3988–3990
QUI R IN , James1977
The Beta Israel (Falasha) in Ethiopian history: Caste formation and culture change. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota (PhD Thesis)
1979“The process of caste formation in Ethiopia: A study of the Beta Israel (Felasha), 1270–
1868”, The International Journal of African Historical Studies 12(2):235–258
R EGNIER , Denis A. P.
2012
Why not marry them? History, essentialism and the condition of slave descendants among
the southern Betsileo (Madagascar). London: London School of Economics (PhD Thesis)
1976

i n troductio n29

SCHLEE , Günther

2004“Taking sides and constructing identities: Reflections on conflict theory”, The Journal of
the Royal Anthropological Institute 10(1):135–156
2008
How enemies are made: Towards a theory of ethnic and religious conflict. New York, Oxford: Berghahn
SCOTT, James
1985
Weapons of the weak: Everyday forms of peasant resistance. New Haven: Yale University
Press
1990
Domination and the arts of resistance: Hidden transcripts. New Haven and London: Yale
University Press
SH ACK , William
1964		“Notes on occupational castes among the Gurage of south-west Ethiopia”, Man 54:5052
The Gurage. A people of the ensete culture, London, New York, Nairobi: Oxford Univer1966
sity Press
ST R AUBE , Helmut
1963
Westkuschitische Völker Süd-Äthiopiens. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer
TA M A R I , Tal
1991“The development of caste systems in West Africa”, The Journal of African History,
32(2):221–250
T eclehaimanot Gebreselassie
2003“The low-caste Fuga occupational group under the Italian administration in the horn ofAfrica”, Northeast African Studies, New Series 10(3):33–44
T H AKUR , Sheetal
2012
Issue of social inclusion and exclusion of Indian tribes, International Journal on Arts,
Management and Humanities 1(1):14–19
TODD , David, M.
1977“Caste in Africa?”, Africa: Journal of the International African Institute 47(4):398–412
T RONVOLL , Kjetil and Tobias H AGM ANN (eds.)
2012
Contested power in Ethiopia: Traditional authorities and multiparty elections. Leiden:
Brill Publisher
T UDEN , Arthur and Leonard PLOTNICOV (eds.)
Social stratification in Africa. New York: Free Press; London: Collier-Macmillan
1970
VAUGH AN , Sarah
Ethnicity and power in Ethiopia. Edinburgh: The University of Edinburgh (PhD Thesis)
2003
W IMMER , Andreas“The making and unmaking of ethnic boundaries: A multilevel process theory”. AJS
2008
113(4):970–1022
YOSHIDA , Sayuri“The struggle against social discrimination: Petitions by the Manjo in the Kafa and2013
Sheka zones of southwest Ethiopia”, Nilo-Ethiopian Studies 18:1–19

30

Susanne Epple

W e b pages
http://kmgethiopia.org, last accessed 15.08.2017
http://iheu.org/caste-discrimination-africa-iheu-speaks-out-african-human-rights-commission,
last accessed 20.08.2017
http://asiadalitrightsforum.org/interventions.php, last accessed 10.08.2017
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/note/join/2013/433805/EXPO-DEVE_
NT(2013)433805_EN.pdf, last accessed 20.08.2017
http://w w w.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/ Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=14690&
LangID=E, last accessed 12.08.2017
http://dobes.mpi.nl, last accessed 15.08.2017
http://idsn.org/wp-content/uploads/user_folder/pdf/Old_files/africa/pdf/Africafull.pdf, last accessed 12.08.2017
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=53511#.WaRHYJHg3wJ,
12.08.2017

lastaccessed