‘Neither fish nor fowl’: an analysis of status ambiguity of the Houses of Chiefs in Ghana
This article sets out to explain the basis of status ambiguity of the Houses of Chiefs and Traditional Councils in Ghana and the implications of this ambiguity on the status of the administrative personnel working in them. The interest was necessitated by complaints from administrative personnel in the Houses of Chiefs who were excluded from the general salary enhancement to all civil servants in Ghana in 2007. Between 2007 and 2009, research was conducted in all the 10 Regional Houses of Chiefs, in the National House of Chiefs and at the Ministry of Chieftaincy and Culture (MCC). While interviews were the main methods used at the MCC, it was combined with observations at the Houses of Chiefs. Primary and secondary documents were also consulted in the process. Data revealed that the Houses of Chiefs serve as “customary” courts for chieftaincy disputes and over the years, have incorporated certain practices of the English common law into their proceedings. Thus, they are neither customary courts in the strictest sense, nor common law courts, which equally explains the difficulty in determining whether or not the administrative personnel in these Houses are civil servants.
<i>Naam</i> Making in Dagbon and the Legitimation of Traditional Authority
This paper focuses on the “naam” making processes—or the installation of chiefs and the investiture of the king—which has been neglected by scholars writing about the Dagbon chieftaincy in the Northern Region of Ghana. Rather, scholars have paid attention to the internal chieftaincy disputes that have bedeviled the kingdom for about a century now. Using content analysis and in-depth interviews with selected chiefs, their elders, kingmakers, and drum historians of the Dagomba in the Northern region of Ghana, this paper provides an analysis of king making as well as chief making process. The paper argues that whilst chieftaincy as an institution could be sociologically considered non-rational, successful “naam” making legitimates the chieftaincy institution enabling its actors (the chiefs) to interact with modern state institutions.
Mutiny Echoes: India, Britons, and Charles Dickens's A Tale of Two Cities
This essay asks what, if any, import the Indian ““Mutiny”” of 1857 had on A Tale of Two Cities (1859), Charles Dickens�s fictionalized account of the French Revolution. Begun shortly after the Indian uprising started, Dickens�s historical novel appears studiously to avoid any mention of events on the Indian subcontinent, even though these events preoccupied and enraged the author. Few scholars have attended to the question of A Tale of Two Cities and the ““Mutiny,”” but when they have, scholars have looked for analogies between India and Dickens�s account of the French Revolution. In this essay, by contrast, I examine A Tale of Two Cities in a larger context——of Britons9 response to the Uprising, of Dickens9s short stories and essays in Household Words in the years before the ““Mutiny”” and immediately after, of Dickens9s disenchantment with aspects of British culture, and of his need to articulate a national identity grounded in action. I argue that the events in India were the match that ignited Dickens9s already established midcentury interests in national identity, nobility, and masculine heroism. I do not wish to suggest that A Tale of Two Cities is an Indian ““Mutiny”” novel, but rather that it is a novel about the ““Making of Britons,”” an important endeavor for an author who was intensely dissatisfied with the Britain that he saw around him.