Bankoe v. Dome: Traditions and Petitions in the Ho-Asogli Amalgamation, British Mandated Togoland, 1919-39

bibliographic database
Line

Periodical article

Title:	Bankoe v. Dome: Traditions and Petitions in the Ho-Asogli Amalgamation, British Mandated Togoland, 1919-39
Author:	Lawrance, Benjamin N.
Year:	2005
Periodical:	The Journal of African History
Volume:	46
Issue:	2
Period:	July
Pages:	243-267
Language:	English
Geographic terms:	Ghana British Togoland
Subjects:	Ewe colonial administration chieftaincy indirect rule 1920-1929 1930-1939 colonialism History and Exploration Peoples of Africa (Ethnic Groups)
External link:	https://www.jstor.org/stable/4100681
Abstract:	This article investigates Ewe engagement with British administrative policy via the story of a chieftaincy dispute in Ho, British Mandated Togoland, that erupted when Britain attempted to amalgamate two neighbouring chieftaincies, Ho-Dome and Ho-Bankoe, by deploying a model with an 'ethnic stamp', that of the neighbouring Akan states. Colonial-era chieftaincy has received substantial scholarly attention. This article argues that the relationship between the models deployed to reorganize chiefly power and the roles of protagonists is just as significant as the layered conflicts within chieftaincies and their respective clans. Two responses to 'Akanized' amalgamation are investigated: the petitions of its opponents, and the rituals developed by chiefs, priests and peasants to herald the amalgamations. Notes, ref., sum. [Journal abstract]