You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Masai and Kikuyu Responses to the Establishment of British Administration in the East Africa Protectorate
G. H. Mungeam
The Journal of African History
Vol. 11, No. 1 (1970), pp. 127-143
Published by: Cambridge University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/180220
Page Count: 17
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Protectorates, Tribal chiefs, Political protests, African history, Forts, Legal evidence, Treaty lands, Elders, New order, Taxes
Were these topics helpful?See something inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
This paper attempts to study the contrasting responses of two Kenya tribes, the Masai and the Kikuyu, to the establishment of British administration. It suggests that neither reacted in the way expected of them by early British officials, who anticipated that the Masai would forcefully oppose the British entry, while little or no resistance was expected from the Kikuyu. Instead, the Masai actively co-operated with the British, through the support of a laibon, Lenana, and the provision of levies who accompanied British punitive expeditions. Although twice removed from their lands, the Masai still did not fight, but appealed to the law courts. When this failed, they showed little or no interest in further opposition. Although apparently having some cause to resent treatment received at the hands of the British, they showed virtually no interest in the protest movements of the twenties. By contrast the Kikuyu, far from standing aside as had been expected, opposed the British entry in a series of short engagements, in which they suffered considerable casualties. Soon, however, collaborators began to emerge and 'chiefs' such as Kinyanjui-created by the British and beholden to them-benefited considerably from the connexion. Despite this co-operation, the earlier resentments continued and were reinforced by losses of land to European settlers, and by the unsettling effects upon tribal life of the proximity of Nairobi and the teaching of the missions. When, after the acute sufferings of the war years, further demands were made by the government, the Kikuyu responded by active participation in organized political protest. Possible reasons are put forward for these contrasting responses, and the suggestion is made that differing attitudes to the protest movements of the twenties can be more fully appreciated when the history of these earlier years is taken into account.
The Journal of African History © 1970 Cambridge University Press