22.- 25.9
2020

Between Annexation and Appropriation or the Production of the Colonial Space

Ute Hasenöhrl, Institut für Geschichtswissenschaften und Europäische Ethnologie; Universität Innsbruck
Nicole Wiederroth, Historisches Institut, Universität Duisburg-Essen

 

23/09/20 2 – 3.30 pm Room HZ 12 (Hörsaalzentrum)

 

Short abstract:

Drawing on historical examples from diverse African regions, the panel discusses the (trans)formation and appropriation of “colonial spaces” with a special focus on formerly neglected space and transient encounters.

 

Over the last decades, there has been growing academic interest in the question of “space” in general and “colonial space” in particular. Challenging traditional views on the dualistic nature of colonial space and society, recent research in African history has explored the manifold – and sometimes contradictory – dynamics that shaped the development, perception, and utilization of various kinds of spaces “on the ground”, highlighting complex processes of appropriation and negotiation within the continuous transformation of overlapping, intermingling, altering, and hybrid zones of contact.

Drawing on empirical examples from several African regions, the panel will discuss ideas of “colonial space” as well as concrete processes of transformation from a social, cultural, and environmental history perspective. Accordingly, the panel investigates both urban and rural contexts, e.g. the contentious shaping and appropriation of nocturnal spaces and (lighting) infrastructures in colonial Accra (Ghana) during the 1920s to 1940s or the environmental transformation of allegedly unhealthy areas in western Tanganyika (Tanzania). We are looking for papers that complement our session. This could be through a different geographical focus or by emphasising other spatial determinants (e.g. infrastructure, architecture, planning, communication, or correspondences). We also invite contributions discussing different concepts of space as well as other methodological approaches bridging various strands of research from history and geography to the social sciences.

Discussing various forms of spatial encounter and transformation, the panel aims to unpack how colonial spaces were constructed and altered, both physically and symbolically, focussing explicitly on practices of negotiation and on the “agency of materiality”. In doing so, the panel will contribute to a more differentiated understanding of how colonial societies worked within specific parameters of time, place, and environment, and of the power dynamics that – sometimes literally – shaped their course.

 

The western part of the former British mandate of Tanganyika Territory was one of the most neglected regions by the colonial government. During the 1920s, this began to alter when the administration initiated development campaigns and evaluations of certain regions. One reason was the spread of African tryponosomiasis, more commonly known as human sleeping sickness.

The paper presents a micro-study dedicated to one region within the former Western Province, namely Utongwe. Based primarily on archive material, it discusses a tour through Utongwe in the 1930s by following the group from the preparation of the tour, through the weeks they spent in Utongwe till their return. With a focus on three different aspects, “mobility”, “visibility”, and “communication”, and inspired strongly by Tim Ingold’s thoughts on environmental perception, of interest are questions about particular preconceptions, possible transformations and complementations in the course of encounters between the colonial officials, representatives, Utongwe authorties, and inhabitants. The paper contributes to a particular part and period of the regions’ history and shows its embeddedness in much broader (inter-)regional contexts. Besides, it demonstrates how environments or perceptions of environments intermingled and how processes of interaction and transformation were racialised.

Nicole Wiederroth is research associate and lecturer for Extra-European History at the University of Duisburg-Essen, Germany.

In the 19th and 20th centuries, the introduction of kerosene, gas, and electric lights profoundly altered night-time habits and perceptions. The commercialization, domestication, and disciplining of nocturnal activities has been termed “colonization of the night” (Melbin 1987; Koslofsky 2011). For most parts of the world, this expression had a double meaning, however, as lighting technologies were also part of the colonization process. Yet, there is very little known about the history of lighting in non-Western regions of the world, particularly Africa. Building on recent research in urban colonial history that has challenged traditional views on the dualistic nature of colonial space and society, the paper explores the history of artificial light and the night in colonial Accra (Ghana) from the 1920s to the 1940s. Emphasizing the socio-cultural impact of technologies and tensions between “Tools of Empire” (Headrick 1981) and everyday experiences (Edgerton 2008; Arnold 2013), it investigates how the production and consumption of artificial light influenced nocturnal practices in the former Gold Coast colony. While the British used modern lighting to visualize power and accentuate social differences, it was also a coveted object of appropriation. And while most colonial cities did not turn into sparkling cities of light overnight, the introduction of new lighting technologies also influenced colonial nightlife, from night-work to nocturnal entertainments. In fact, both colonial light and darkness were ambivalent phenomena. Modern lighting was a contested commodity, both sought after and spurned, and decisions for (or against) illumination projects not only influenced by a variety of actors, motives, and factors, but also subject to a significant amount of “African agency”.

Ute Hasenöhrl is assistant professor for social and economic history at University of Innsbruck, Austria, at the Department of History and European Ethnology.

The history of the Zambian city of Livingstone, today a thriving tourist destination, dates back to the early 20th century. As a central node and in the line of rail between Southern Africa and the Copperbelt, Livingstone functioned as the capital of Northern Rhodesia till 1935, when the capital was moved to Lusaka. The once administrative center of the colony not only lost a great deal of its European population and financial means, but also had to reimagine and reinvent itself as a self-proclaimed cultural and tourist capital in the course of this event. When the three colonies of Northern Rhodesia, Southern Rhodesia and Nyasaland were amalgamated into the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland between 1953 and 1963 against the will of many parts of their African populations the Europeans of Livingstone, mainly composed of settlers, saw new opportunities for the small and in their perception often neglected town.
Based on a never realised plan to (re)make the Northern Rhodesian town Livingstone into the capital city of the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland the proposed paper examines the aspirations and ideologies of a colonial urban community. In critically analysing this plan through the study of written archival records and colonial maps, the paper seeks to locate the socio-historical and spatial contexts behind the plan as well as its imagined urban morphology.
The paper is thus understood as a contribution to the historical study of so called secondary cities and SMSTs (small and medium sized towns) in a late colonial context and to the study of historical urban morphology as means to scrutinise socio-spatial relations, imaginaries and ideologies. A detailed analysis of the “Plan for the expansion of Livingstone Northern Rhodesia to accommodate the Federal Capital of the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland” will be undertaken using additional archival materials and secondary sources. Furthermore, reference will be made to interviews with Livingstonians conducted in 2017 and 2018 in order to highlight how some of the colonial urban aspirations and ideologies have endured and are still shaping the urban form and its representational space.

Carl-Philipp Bodenstein is a doctoral student in African History and Societies at the University of Vienna, Austria.

During the last years of the Colonial War (1963-1974), the Portuguese army built across the territory of Guinea-Bissau approximately sixty resettlements, operating a profound violation of rural environment and its communities. The resettlements policy was implemented during the government of Governor General António de Spínola (1968-1972) under the so-called plan Uma Guiné Melhor (A Better Guinea). This was announced to be a socio-economic development program aimed to build “the Guinea of the future” through “a social promotion of the population” in rural areas (Spínola, 1970). Instead, the plan was driven by counterrevolution purposes aimed to guarantee the control of both territory and people, in particular through military spatialization accomplished by the resettlements practice.

In order to better comprehend and discuss the deep and controversial marks that this military colonial strategy seems to have left on the Guinean territory, both physically and symbolically, it is important to understand the detrimental effects that the Uma Guiné Melhor plan had on native population during the war time. In fact, the resettlements practice was never a smooth process, on the contrary it was a violent intrusion in people life and living environment. Architecture and urban planning were used by the army as tool of power amongst Guinean rural population. People were displaced from their traditional villages and houses and forced or “persuaded” (as it is reported by the official colonial records) to live into a new domestic order, planned according to military needs of discipline, efficacy and control. The resettled villages resemble military camps, based on grid plan implantation and standardized housing units.

The aim of this article is to highlight and analyse how the colonial heritage of military resettlements built by the Portuguese army during the Colonial War, has been perpetuated until nowadays through contradictory dynamics of appropriation and transformation of both architectural and urban environments. Case studies of contemporary small and medium cities will be presented to showcase the overlapping layers of appropriation, succeeded from the colonial period throughout the post-independence time, revealing the grey areas that arose from the perpetuation of this colonial military heritage. Some cases show extensive preservation of the implemented colonial resettlements comprising houses and/or facilities, such as a sanitary posts, primary schools and water supply systems which still operate today as in the past; others conserve the military grid implantation introducing new houses typologies to address current needs.

By the means of comparative analysis based on the field research, cartography reproduction and house typologies surveys, this article aims to highlight the contradictory process of appropriation of the military legacy of the resettlements, unpacking the colonial marks in the contemporary Guinea-Bissau.

Francesca Vita, is a doctoral student in architectural heritage at the Faculty of Architecture of the University of Porto (FAUP-PT), Portugal.