ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025
Page 5357
www.rsisinternational.org
The paper revisits how the British colonial state reconfigured the existing structure and institutions of political
power and authority in Acholiland to organize and govern society as a way to entrench its extractive logic. This
occurred in three major phases. First, by deploying missionaries, church education institutions (schools,
catechism), and interpreters, the British attempted to transform the intellectual consciousness of Acholi society
to construct an “educated” governable modernized native subject, constructed in the image of British logic of
rule. Second, British rule introduced the institution of native law and custom into Acholi to ground indirect rule
whereby colonial chiefs mediated state’s access to society. By fragmenting the institutions and offices of
traditional Acholi power, represented by Rwodi kalam (educated chiefs) vis-à-vis Rwodi moo (anointed chiefs),
British governance excised political authority of its chosen Rwodi kalam from the cultural component relegated
to Rwodi moo and thereby vulgarized chiefly authority. Consequently, political chiefs were cut off from their
social base and this made Native chiefs lose legitimacy, leading to the outbreak of social discontent and conflict.
This was also manifested in the naming format whereby Acholi offices were renamed Ganda terms such as
Mukungu, Muluka (parish chief), village chief, etcetera, which further fragmented society due to confusion of
political and cultural roles. By creating new territorial offices where they did not exist before, the British
reconfigured the spatial reach of Acholi hereditary institutions leading to a clash of roles, duties and
responsibilities in restricted “homelands”.
: Colonial Governance, Missionary Education, Chiefly authority, Acholiland.
This paper presents the construction of Acholi customary authority by the British colonial governance between
1889 to 1962. It argues that the British colonial state reconfigured the existing structure and institutions of power
in Acholiland to organise and govern society so as to entrench its extractive logic. This occurred in three major
phases. First, by deploying missionaries, church education institutions (schools, catechism), and interpreters, the
British attempted to transform the intellectual consciousness of Acholi society to construct an “educated”
governable modernized native subject, constructed in the image of British logic of rule. Second, British rule
introduced the institution of native law and custom into Acholi to ground indirect rule whereby colonial chiefs
mediated state’s access to society. By fragmenting the institutions and offices of traditional Acholi power,
represented by Rwodi kalam (educated chiefs) vis-à-vis Rwodi moo (anointed chiefs), British governance
excised political authority of its chosen Rwodi kalam from the cultural component relegated to Rwodi moo and
thereby vulgarized chiefly authority. Consequently, political chiefs were cut off from their social base and this
made Native chiefs lose legitimacy, leading to the outbreak of social discontent and conflict. This was also
manifested in the naming format whereby Acholi offices were renamed Ganda terms such as Mukungu, Muluka
(parish chief), village chief, etcetera, which further fragmented society due to confusion of political and cultural
roles. By creating new territorial offices where they did not exist before, the British destabilized the spatial reach
of Acholi hereditary institutions leading to a clash of roles, duties and responsibilities, in restricted “homelands”.
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025
Page 5358
www.rsisinternational.org
Third, confusion of political and cultural roles in various offices led to the outbreak of social discontent leading
to resistance most symbolized by the Lamogi rebellion of 1911-12. Social discontent also revealed the deepening
social divisions between an increasingly educated commoner stratum, anglicized educated elites, and an
emerging petty bourgeoisie, all of whom struggled to and jostled for positions of influence to appear useful to
the new British authorities.
This paper also shows that whereas aspects of the micro sphere such as cultural rituals showed a disinterested
colonial state, the purpose of the civilizing mission, however reveals that the macro sphere governed and
influenced many practices of society including those that attempted to evade it. Episodes of resistance against
British rule were not unique to Acholi but can be understood in the tension between the modernizing claims of
the British colonial logic and its actual practice, which left unfulfilled hopes in many areas under colonial yoke.
This paper, however, identifies the specific ways in which colonial contradictions presented themselves in
Acholiland and the various efforts of the colonial state, interpreted as “colonial reform” to prevent imperial
decline. I will show in this paper that colonial reform as a response to native resistance was only possible because
the colonial structure had stabilized. In this consolidative phase, colonial rule relied mainly on disguized consent
as opposed to naked violence to achieve its aims and therefore endear its logic to the masses. I hope to show that
the earlier attempts to ethicize Acholi into a “tribe” allowed the British to enforce the idea of Acholi as a tribal
homeland against the very logic of a diverse Acholi society in the precolonial period.
This paper is organized into two major sections, the first section presents the actual British construction of
customary authority anchored in an “ethnic’ and “trialist” image. I show here the transformation of Acholi society
was first and foremost intellectual and epistemic because British forerunners such as missionary agents and
church schools allowed a new form of modern values and sensibilities to enter Acholi society to inform the native
behaviours and practices. Relatedly, the extension of Anglican version of Christianity as the ideology of official
statecraft in Acholi allowed an educated Anglicized stratum to be chosen for colonial administration. Also, new
offices were created, which affected the territorial organization of counties, which also created political
confusion, leading to social strife. The second section discusses the nature of native responses, focusing on the
unique issues in Acholi that spurred conflict. I also show here that the nature of native agency as resistance was
produced by colonial structure. I highlight the aspects of colonial reform and emphasize that it continued the
colonial logic because it merely changed tactics of coercive rule disguised as consent. Furthermore, the fact that
Acholi actors joined political parties like DP and UPC merely continued political action as conceived in the
image of imperial power in its foresight for the end of colonialism.
It is important to state from the outset that colonial intervention in Acholi like in other parts of Africa was shaped
by the ‘civilizing mission’ based on racial stereotypes deployed by the colonizing forces to justify their political
and economic objectives in the protectorate. Missionary work and Anglicization played a critical role in
introducing new cultural values that would form the basis of new forms of sociality to transform the Acholi
colonial subject into a governable community. British administrators depicted the people of Acholi as uncivilized
and immoral individuals who frequently went naked, highlighting their perceived lack of civilization
1
.
Particularly, on the existing political system, they perceived the autonomy of the Acholi and the fragmented
control of territories among chiefs who had limited authority over their subjects as inadequate to advance colonial
interests in the region compared with that of Buganda kingdom systems
2
. Karuna Mantena has written that the
British colonial state utilized its experiences in late colonial India to design a regime of subjectivity that was
based on introducing values such as British education and Christianity termed as civilizing mission as an alibi
for the colonization process.
3
1
Moorehead, Alan. "The White Nile." (1960), p.68; see also, Laruni, Elizabeth. From the Village to Entebbe: The Acholi of
Northern Uganda and the Politics of Identity, 1950-1985. University of Exeter (United Kingdom), 2014, p.84.
2
Moorehead, Alan.
"The White Nile." (1960), p.68.
3
Mantena, Karuna (2010), Alibis of Empire,
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025
Page 5359
www.rsisinternational.org
Once in Uganda, the British colonial state applied a template similar to its colonial experience in India by
propping up missionary schools and Anglican values as beacons of its civilizing mission to work as the precursor
to the formal colonization of the territory. The responsibility of influencing societal norms and practices fell
largely on Anglican and Catholic missionaries who aimed to convert and assimilate the indigenous population.
But the missionaries restricted their activities in ‘mission villages’ within the vicinity of established missionary
stations in urban areas
2
. Beyond these villages Acholi continued to worship Jok (Supreme being) and performed
traditional rituals unrestrained.
3
Missionaries such as catechists and lay workers played a forerunner role to the colonial agents and were
instrumental in aiding colonial powers in exerting control and influence over local systems of social
consciousness and governance. Whereas Chapter two highlighted the fact that Acholi did not have a centralized
belief system, but multiple deities, with each chiefdom having its own Jok (Supreme being), missionary
education came to transform this fact and presented the idea of British cosmological order to displace the Acholi
belief model. Christian missionaries introduced a standardized worship for all the Acholi, requiring them to
worship only one Supreme being, the Christian God, instead of multiple deities. As discussed in chapter two, in
the pre-colonial period every chiefdom in Acholi had a Jok kaka, as they are called. The missionaries begun by
degrading the Acholi cosmology including portraying the Jok as evil beings and labelled the native priests
(Ajwaka) as witch doctors and sorcerers, aligning them with Satan. This depiction was heavily criticized by Okot
P'Bitek as inaccurate and misleading. Conversely, P’Bitek viewed the Ajwaka as a multifaceted figure, serving
as a psychiatrist, healer, priest and provider of solutions for the Acholi people
4
.
Importantly, in the process of discrediting the Jok, the missionaries undermined the chiefdoms and chiefly power,
as the Acholi believed that the chiefdoms were sanctioned by the Jok and the chiefs were ordained by them, thus
drawing spiritual authority from them to maintain social order and seek divine blessings such as health, fertility,
and favourable weather, as outlined in Chapter two. This clash of belief systems between traditional Acholi
structures and Christian missionaries significantly impacted the religious and socio-political landscape of the
Acholi community. The missionaries, particularly the Verona Fathers and the British CMS, played a significant
role in shaping Acholi society within the context of colonial indirect rule
5
. Their influence was so profound that
they became instrumental in maintaining authority and control on behalf of the colonial administration. While
Native Administration served as a prominent channel for colonial power, missionary institutions also exerted
considerable influence through their actions mirroring colonial practices, such as tax collection and legal
judgments
6
. This alignment with the missionaries led to a transformation in power dynamics within Acholi
society, as identification with the missionaries becoming a key aspect of acquiring influence and status. In most
cases, being Anglican was the pre-requisite for becoming a chief. For example, in 1913, of the thirty-six Acholi
baptized, thirteen were appointed as native chiefs
9
.
Relatedly, the missionaries strategically targeted sons of chiefs, taking them to separate missionary stations in
Gulu and Kitgum towns. During the period between 1917 and 1962, various Christian groups such as the Mill
Hill Fathers and the Verona Fathers established missionary stations in the Acholi region, attracting readers
(Lokotyeno) from chiefdoms like Palaro, Paimol, Patongo, Adilang, and Palabek. These readers would undergo
a period of three to six months of religious instruction at these stations before being baptized. Those from non-
royal backgrounds who received missionary education used this opportunity to rise in Acholi society, becoming
prominent figures like appointed chiefs and politicians in the District Council. In Lokotyeno schools/stations,
Acholi learners were not only instructed in catechism but were also instilled with Western values like obedience
and loyalty to authority while discouraging subjects that could build political consciousness and revolutions
7
.
The Christian educational approach aimed to facilitate a mindset change conducive to smooth colonization.
2
Wild, John Vernon. "Early travelers in Acholi." (No Title) (1954), p.58.
3
Solomon Oyat (Resurgence of Acholi Customary Authority), interviewed by Tony Apecu, July 2023, Nwoya District.
4
p'Bitek, Okot. Song of Lawino. Vol. 2. East African Publishers, 1995.
5
Wild, John Vernon. "Early travelers in Acholi." (No Title)(1954), p38.
6
Laruni, Elizabeth. From the Village to Entebbe, p.79.
9
Ibid.
7
Odongkara Moses (Resurgence of Acholi Customary Authority), interviewed by Tony Apecu, May 2023, Kitgum District.
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025
Page 5360
www.rsisinternational.org
Additionally, Acholi students were taught their own history and culture to foster a sense of unity among the
Acholi people. Books like Lok pa Acholi Macon (Acholi history) and The Lwo Language by Rev. Pellegrini and
Rev. Crazzolara respectively were utilized in teaching Acholi learners, highlighting the role of missionary
writings in shaping the educational curriculum and collective identity of the Acholi community. This resonates
with the observation by Igham that ‘the education was designed to shape the character of the students and change
their minds in preparation to colonial modernity
8
. To Mudoola the “colonial education domesticated its subject,
at least in parts…the educated were domesticated to support missionary and later colonialists in their diverse
activities”
9
. This shift towards a collective Acholi identity over allegiance to specific chiefdoms reflects a
broader goal of shaping character and preparing individuals for colonial modernity
10
, aligning with the
missionaries' efforts to bring about social and cultural transformation within the Acholi community.
The appointment of chiefs from missionary-educated Acholi elites led to destabilization in customary authority,
with conflicts arising between the appointed chiefs (Rwodi Kalam) and the hereditary chiefs (Rwodi Moo).
Girling observed that missionary mobilization activities weakened the traditional authority of chiefs, creating
room for colonial authorities to restructure customary power more smoothly and with reduced resistance
14
. This
shift between traditional leadership structures, missionary influence, and colonial interests within the Acholi
community would later implicate the power relations in Acholi
11
.
Furthermore, missionaries promoted a tribal consciousness in Acholi and neighbouring areas primarily by
developing a written vernacular language and producing written accounts of local tribal history and customs.
Girling observed that history would be written to fit the “needs of the present social order”
12
which was the
creating of Acholi as a distinct tribe which did not exist in pre-colonial period due to multiple presence of
different language speaking groups in the now Acholiland. Later missionary-educated elites like Rueben
Anywar
13
and Lacito Okech adopted the writing of Acholi histories and delved into the history of their people,
but also facilitated an exchange of knowledge between missionaries, colonizers, and local scholars, shaping the
historical narrative of Acholi society. Lacito Okech's contribution to missionary work through his writings even
led to his appointment as the chief of Koch chiefdom
14
, emphasizing the significant role missionaries played in
influencing not just governance but also intellectual and cultural pursuits within the Acholi community.
Nonetheless, the missionary had direct influence and control only over the households (mission villages) living
in the immediate vicinity of their churches, who were regarded as ‘the people of the mission.’ Beyond the mission
homes, “non-Anglican” practices such as polygamy and traditional religious beliefs, were prevalent especially
in areas where colonial influence had not reached. Moreover, missionary activities faced resistance, with some
chiefs refusing to send their children to missionary schools due to the belief that Western education could
undermine traditional leadership skills. Instead, they preferred their sons to undergo traditional training, resulting
in a disparity in educational attainment between chiefly families and commoners. This resistance was however
temporary because with time, many commoner families realized the need to attain western education and took it
up with the fact that commoner families, whose children were more likely to attend missionary schools, emerged
as influential figures in the Acholi community and have played a significant role in shaping affairs in the region,
surpassing the chiefly authorities in terms of Western education and influence.
To conclude this section, it is noteworthy that Missionary education played a dual role in serving both colonial
interests and local/national interests, as some of the educated intellectuals later became advocates for their
8
Ingham, Kenneth. The making of modern Uganda. Routledge, 2023, p.125.
9
Mudoola, Dan M. "Religion, ethnicity, and politics in Uganda." (No Title) (1996), p.75.
10
Amone, Charles, “ Colonialism and the creation of Acholi ethnic identity in Uganda, 1894 to 1962", p.85.
14
Girling, Frank. The Acholi of Uganda, p.202;
11
Girling, Frank. The Acholi of Uganda. London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Offices (1960) , p.202; see Komujuni, Sophie. "To be a
chief and to remain a chief: The Production of Customary Authority in Post-Post Conflict Northern Uganda." PhD diss., Ghent
University, 2019, p.53-54.
12
Girling, Frank. The Acholi of Uganda. London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Offices (1960), p.199.
13
Anywar, Reuben Stephen. "The life of rwot Iburaim Awich." Uganda Journal 12, no. 1 (1948): 72-81.
14
Otim, Patrick W. "Local Intellectuals: Lacito Okech and the Production of Knowledge in Colonial Acholiland." History in Africa
45 (2018): 275-305.
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025
Page 5361
www.rsisinternational.org
community and nation. Initially, the colonial state needed interpreters, who must have either passed through the
education system or been Arab interpreters. Acholi interpreters like Okello Mwaka, Obwona Shuli, and Omara
Angamu played a crucial role in the British colonial administration by bridging the language barrier and
facilitating communication between the colonialists and the Acholi people. Their fluency in both English and
Arabic allowed for effective communication and negotiation, ultimately aiding in the extension and
entrenchment of British rule in Acholi. This highlights the significance of local interpreters in colonial
governance and their role in facilitating interactions between colonial powers and indigenous communities.
Some of the interpreters were later integrated into the colonial administration. For example, Okello Mwaka was
appointed as the chief of Puranga but was rejected and later killed for championing colonial policies against the
interest of the indigenous. The Acholi interpreters, many of whom had previous experience working with Arabs,
were more inclined towards supporting the establishment of British Administration in the hope of being
integrated into the colonial system, rather than working within traditional chiefdoms. These interpreters sought
to regain their positions of influence and power that they had enjoyed while working for the Arabs. This shows
agency of the interpreters who through personal motivations and strategic calculations aligned themselves with
the changing colonial powers to assert their own positions within the evolving power structures. The interpreters
did more than mediate colonial power over the indigenous.
British colonial officials intended to transform the nature of Acholi political organization, which they thought
was unsuitable as a tool of British administration.
15
With such hindsight, colonial officials went to Acholi with
the perception that the past Acholi indigenous society lacked any real organization or continuity as expressed by
Postlethwaite, the pioneer District Commissioner for East Acholi with its Headquarters in Kitgum:
I was dealing with a tribe that had no system of ancient holdings, nothing that answered the Bataka of Buganda,
whose life was at the tie of communal and who from force of circumstances, had perforce been in the habit of
moving every few years of their own volition.
16
Commenting on colonial intervention in Acholi, Adam Branch observes that “the British created chiefs in
Acholiland on the model that they imagined proper African chiefs would be and believed to help raise
particularly the savage Acholi up the civilization ladder”
17
. As highlighted in the above section, the
configuration of customary power in Acholi like in other segmentary or ‘stateless’ society was shaped by colonial
racial prejudice and misinterpretation of the existing political system as well as the need for administrative
convenience, reduction on administrative costs and fear of possible violent resistances by the natives. But the
absence of a chiefly structure was in some areas, as Postlehwaite noted in 1915, a “blessing in disguise” since
no “hereditary chieftainships” could be recognized.
22
This would give the British an opportunity to reconfigure
Acholi political structure and culture in their own image because they could deny the pre-existing Acholi
structure as suitable for their own needs and interests. They hence proceeded to construct their own tribal and
ethnic idea of Acholi society.
To begin with, historians and anthropologists on Acholi such as Bere
18
, Atkinson
19
and Girling
20
consider 1898
as a pivotal moment in the modern administration of Northern Uganda. This date symbolizes a notable shift in
the relationship of Acholi from its connection to Egypt and Sudan towards becoming integrated within the
emerging Uganda Protectorate. Despite holding prejudiced views of the Acholi people as "naturally lazy" and
their land as lacking economic potential competition from French and Belgian colonial interests in the region
15
Bere, Rennie M. "An outline of Acholi history." Uganda Journal1 Vol 11, no. 1 (1947), p.58.
16
Postlethwaite, John Rutherford Parkin (1947): I Look Back. London: T. V. Boardman, p.56-7.
17
Branch, Adam. Displacing human rights: War and intervention in northern Uganda. Oxford University Press, 2011, p.49.
22
Postlethwaite, John Rutherford Parkin (1947): I Look Back, p.56-7.
18
Bere, Rennie M. "An outline of Acholi history.”, p. 4
19
Atkinson, Ronald R. The Roots of Ethnicity: The Origins of the Acholi of Uganda Before 18. University of Pennsylvania Press,
2015, p.262.
20
Girling, Frank. The Acholi of Uganda. London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Offices (1960), p.199.
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025
Page 5362
www.rsisinternational.org
compelled the British to include Acholi within the political framework of the Uganda Protectorate
21
. The policy
of indirect rule implemented by the British government in Acholi allowed for the preservation of certain
traditional practices among the local population. By appointing chiefs, collecting taxes, facilitating conversion
to Christianity, and promoting education, the colonial administration enforced certain changes while still
maintaining a degree of continuity in the traditional ways of life for the Acholi peasants
22
. The policy of indirect
rule in Acholi meant that the natives were expected to adopt specific changes mentioned above while preserving
their traditional way of life. Beyond these specified adjustments, the local population was encouraged to continue
with their traditional practices, showcasing the selective nature of colonial intervention in maintaining certain
aspects of indigenous culture within the framework of colonial governance.
23
This means that colonial structure
intended to produce a colonial subject who was obedient to the colonial authorities but also disciplined and
deattached to the social base of cultural customs and traditions.
24
Tribalization of social groups in Acholiland into one “tribal” group became a key component of colonial
governance. The most outstanding impact that colonial production and reproduction of customary power which
was mainly aimed at unifying Acholi as a tribal entity in tribal homeland has been achieved. Since then, Acholi
ethnic card has been deployed to determine politics at the local and national level. In this connection, the colonial
authorities effectively consolidated the diverse chiefdom boundaries in Acholi to establish a singular political
identity of the "Acholi tribe" within a defined tribal homeland. This deliberate restructuring institutionalized a
rigid categorization of "Acholiness," which subsequently became a determining factor for inclusion or exclusion
during the colonial era and beyond. The imposition of this singular identity framework emphasized tribal
affiliations over geographical residency, shaping social dynamics and power structures in the region under
colonial rule. This territorial reorganization by the British further solidified the concept of the Acholi as a distinct
and separate entity, reinforcing boundaries that had not been previously as pronounced and potentially disrupting
the pre-existing social and economic interconnectedness among different chiefdoms in the region. In this
connection, Girling notes:
The whole of Acholi to a greater or lesser degree now forms one large group of persons, united by bonds which
are a combination of kinship, territorial, political relationship and ritual, as well as by bonds of common
subjection to alien rulers and of territorial and secular relationships.
Another impact that can be derived from the above extract is the polarization between Acholi and other ethnic
groups through colonial boundary demarcation, separating Acholi from neighbouring Alur and Madi
communities. This resonates with Mamdani’s claim that every institution touched by the hand of the colonial
state was given a pronounced regional or ethnic character. It became a truism that a soldier must be a northerner,
a civil servant, a southerner, and merchant, an Asian. In northern Uganda, as a strategy of divide and rule the
British discouraged inter -district networking and trading and instead encouraged internal development of each
tribal district. The delineation of what later became known as Acholi territory was a colonial construct. The
precolonial period, within the chieftaincies, there were instances where individuals of different ethnic origins
lived together without discrimination, such as the Paracel people of Madi origin in the Palabek chiefdom. Neither
the area nor the people who inhabited it were perceived as a unit, either by the people themselves or by
neighbouring groups. This highlights the complex dynamics of pre-colonial social structures and interactions
that were reshaped by colonial policies and administrative boundaries in the region.
A new ethnic homeland was created by administrative fiat when the British colonial offices were set up in Gulu
district in 1910, followed by the establishment of Chua district with its headquarters in Kitgum in 1914
25
. By
1913, East and West Acholi were designated as separate districts, each led by a District Commissioner, typically
21
Laruni, Elizabeth. From the Village to Entebbe: The Acholi of Northern Uganda and the Politics of Identity, 1950-1985. University
of Exeter (United Kingdom), 2014, p.68.
22
Wild, John Vernon. "Early travelers in Acholi." (No Title) (1954), p.58.
23
Ibid.
24
Jean and John Comaroff (1992), ‘Home Made Hegemony: Modernity Domesticity and Colonialism in South Africa’, In Karen
Hansen (ed.) African Encounter with Domesticity. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, pp. 37-74.
25
Karugire, Samwiri Rubaraza. "Roots of instability in Uganda.", p.21.
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025
Page 5363
www.rsisinternational.org
a white individual with Mr. Sullivan for Gulu district and Mr. J.P.R. Postlethwaite for Kitgum district
26
. This
transition meant that numerous chieftaincies, which previously operated independently, were now governed by
foreign administration. In 1937, the two districts were amalgamated into one Acholi District with its headquarters
in Gulu district under a white District Commissioner. The amalgamation of the two districts came with the
integration of chiefs into Acholi Council and the constitution of the Council which was formalized in ordinances
issued in 1949. On 5
th
March 1938, the Provincial Commissioner, Northern Province in his Annual Report on
the State of Native Authority stated how the amalgamation of Gulu and Chua districts to form one administrative
unit headquatered in Gulu, became an “important landmark”
27
. This amalgamation meant that pre-colonial
chiefly offices, roles, actors, and interests were reconfigured in the new British image of tribal homeland for the
Acholi people, setting the stage for a politics of decentralized despotism against local forms of social democracy
and diversified political power.
During the re-organization process, the British established a hierarchical structure of chiefs at various levels;
County, Sub- county/Division, Parish, and village. This system aimed at increasing efficiency and reducing costs
in governance. In this process, local individuals who demonstrated influence over rural communities and
supported colonial rule were selected and appointed as 'chiefs' by the Colonial Administration, incorporating
them into the governmental framework.
28
This reconfiguration had a logic. As both early European
anthropologists and colonial officials defined non-Bantu speakers like Acholi in terms of political institutions
that they lacked but not in terms of how they organized their political life,
29
which points to a choice to
misrepresent Acholi segmentary political power as suggested by Karugire that “coming from a centralized
government themselves, the British “could not make head nor tail of the segmentary societies of Uganda most
of which were to be found in eastern and northern Uganda”
30
. In this connection, Hesketh Bell, cited by Girling
referred to Acholi as:
Unlike those of Uganda (Buganda) and Unyoro (Bunyoro), are apparently unwilling to submit to the domination
by chiefs. There were no more powerful local authorities through which we may transmit our directions, and
every group of families seems to live independently and to be more or less at various with their neighbours.
31
Against this backdrop and the British experience in Buganda, colonial administration sought to reshape Acholi
political and administrative systems by imposing elements of the centralizing model and the British Local
Government model through the indirect rule system. Key to this endeavour was the institution of chiefs, tribes,
tribal homelands, and customary law, with tribes being invented based on administrative territorial cohesion.
This process reflects the colonial administration's efforts to assert control and establish a hierarchical system that
would serve their governance objectives, despite the diverse and intricate social structures already present in
Acholi society. This resonates with Mamdani’s view that “often tribes were created based on administrative
territorial contiguity as villages were brought together under a single administrative authority. Chiefship was
similarly manufactured, and chiefs were imposed”
32
. Mamdani’s observation underscores the complex dynamics
of colonial governance and the manipulation of traditional structures to serve colonial interests. Drawing on the
relatively successful implementation of indirect rule in Buganda, the British were eager to introduce a similar
system in Acholi. British officials were dispatched to the region to garner support from local chiefs, aiming for
a seamless establishment of colonial authority. Treaties were swiftly prepared for chiefs to sign, described by
Dwyer as meticulously worded documents with blank spaces for names and dates, primarily designed to
preemptively assert British control over Acholi's foreign affairs.
33
26
Girling, Frank. The Acholi of Uganda, p.121.
27
MUL/AS, Annual Report from Provincial Commissioner on Native Adminstration, Northern Province, 31
st
December 1937, p.30
28
Ibid.
29
Odoi-Tanga, Fredrick. "Politics, ethnicity and conflict in post independent Acholiland, Uganda 1962-2006." PhD diss., University
of Pretoria, 2010, p.103.
30
Karugire, Samwiri Rubaraza. "Roots of instability in Uganda." (No Title) (1996), p.21.
31
Girling, Frank. The Acholi of Uganda, p.199.
32
Mamdani, Mahmood. "Citizen and subject." In Citizen and Subject. Princeton University Press, 2018, p.41. see also Crowder,
Michael. "Indirect rule—French and British style." Africa 34, no. 3 (1964): 197-205, p.178; Khapoya, V.B., The African Experience:
An Introduction, Longman, 2010, p.10; Ranger, Terence. "The invention of tradition revisited: the case of colonial Africa." In
Legitimacy and the State in Twentieth-century Africa, pp. 62-111. Palgrave Macmillan, London, 1993, p.63.
33
Dwyer, John Orr. The Acholi of Uganda: Adjustment to Imperialism. Columbia University, 1972, p61-62.
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025
Page 5364
www.rsisinternational.org
In mid-1898, Major MacDonald moved from Kampala to northern Uganda with two intentions: First, was to
clear the remnants of the Nubian mutineers from Buganda who migrated to the north. Second, sign treaties which
he did with several local chiefs from several chiefdoms, save for Payira chiefdom where he failed to come to
terms with chief Awich.
34
Macdonald was replaced by Major Delme-Radcliff, who combined carrot and stick in
his quest to subjugate Acholi under colonial administration. Writing in 1947, Bere who served as a District and
Provincial Commissioner for Northern Uganda notes that Major Delme-Radcliff, “became a legendary figure
in Acholi where he made useful contacts with many of the chiefs and his recommendations of identifying chiefs
with the quality of colonial administration and making them part of the government organizations, shows his
wisdom and foresight.”
35
Major Delme-Radcliff, known as ‘Langa,’ by indigenous people gained a reputation
for employing a military strategy to quell rebellious chiefs in Acholi during his expeditions
36
. The nickname
‘Langa Langa,’ referencing a lion that operates at night signifies his fierce and strategic approach to dealing with
opposition and maintaining control in the region. This depiction highlights the use of force and intimidation by
colonial authorities to assert dominance over resistant elements within Acholi society.
42
The key administrative
changes can be seen below:
At the highest level of the administrative structure, six counties were established under County
Chiefs who retained the traditional title of the Rwot (Acholi name for chief). These Counties were named after
significant geographical features such as rivers and mountains, including Aswa, Kilak, Omoro, Chua, Agago,
and Lamwo as opposed to the names of the major chiefdoms. The naming strategy was aimed at unifying
disparate chiefdoms into a cohesive Acholi tribe and centralize the political system under the colonial governance
framework. This deliberate effort to consolidate and organize the region's diverse entities reflects the colonial
administration's approach to governance and its impact on local power structures in Uganda. To advance the goal
of centralization and unification, non-hereditary leaders, referred to as Rwodi Kalam (loosely translated as chiefs
of pens), were appointed at the county and lower levels in addition to the traditional hereditary chiefs known as
Rwodi moo (loosely translated as anointed chiefs). In some instances, this led to the displacement of hereditary
chiefs, causing tension between the two categories of leaders. This intentional restructuring of leadership roles
from hereditary to appointed positions showcases the complexities and challenges inherent in blending
traditional and colonial governance systems, highlighting the power dynamics that emerged during this period
of transition in northern Uganda. For instance, it was only in Aswa, Lamwo and Agago Counties where the sons
of Rwot Awich of Payira; Rwot Ogwok of Padibe and Odier Abar of Adilang lineage were recognized
respectively. The County Chiefs of Kilak, Omoro and Chua were either strangers in their areas or the descendants
of commoners
37
, implying that the ritual context in these areas were separate from the political authorities since
the appointed chiefs did not have traditional legitimacy to perform any rituals in clans to which they did not
belong. Gradually, appointments to chiefly official and administrative offices tended to be made from the
emerging educated class irrespective of lineage background.
38
Under the County Chief in the administrative hierarchy, the position of Jago
(plural: Jagi) Division or Sub- county chief was established
39
. This restructuring led to the reduction in status of
the previously autonomous chiefdoms of the Acholi to Sub-counties; like Palabek Sub- county, Padibe Sub-
county, and Puranga Sub- county. Although the Sub-counties were named after prominent chiefdoms,
nonhereditary leaders were also appointed as Sub- county chiefs, indicating a deliberate shift towards a
centralized administration that integrated traditional titles with colonial governance structures in Acholi.
40
34
Anywar, Reuben Stephen. "The life of rwot Iburaim Awich." Uganda Journal 12, no. 1 (1948), p.72-81; see also Gray, John Milner.
"Acholi history, 1860-1901." Uganda Journal 15 (1951): 121-143, p.41.
35
Bere, Rennie M. "An outline of Acholi history.", p.7.
36
Ibid.
42
Ibid.
37
Amone, Charles, "British colonialism and the creation of Acholi ethnic identity in Uganda, 1894 to 1962.”, PhD Dissertation, 2014,
38
Finnström, Sverker. Living with bad surroundings: War, history, and everyday moments in northern Uganda. Duke University Press,
2008, p.33.
39
Bere, land chieftainship among the Acholi, p.50-52; see also Paine, Clare. "Ker Kwaro Acholi." A Re-Invention of Traditional
Authority in Northern (2014), p.53.
40
Ibid, p.52.
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025
Page 5365
www.rsisinternational.org
The colonial administration introduced the office of Parish chief, known locally as a Mukungu
(plural Bakungu), within the newly reorganized administrative system. It is important to note that the term
'Mukungu' was of Bantu origin and had no equivalent position in the traditional pre-colonial political structures
of the region. This imposition of foreign administrative titles underscores the significant changes and influences
brought about by colonial rule on local governance systems and leadership roles in Uganda. The Bakungu were
chosen by the County Council. Each Mukungu would be responsible for between four hundred to seven hundred
poll taxpayers.
41
To avoid any conflict of interest, on assumption of power, Mukungu ceased to be the
representative of his own clan, which is another fundamental change in the Acholi political system, which
ensured that political action was bent and bound to a new political master. Underpinning this action was the
imperious belief by the colonial officials that chiefs at all levels should act as unifying political figures to
centralize the various clans into a larger tribal group that could be more easily administered.
42
This was well
observed by Bere who noted that “the urgent trend of modern administration has been to bring the clans together
and to make Acholi conscious of their unity as a single people.”
43
Building on the argument by Bere, Amone
and Amuura claim that reorganization of customary power was aimed at creation of a bigger Acholi tribal identity
and that was a reason that the villagers were encouraged not to attach too much importance to their clan
identities.
44
For the colonial authority to assume that chiefs would become a unifying political figure for the
entire Acholi was to ignore the power of the clan system from below (clan heads, Rwodi Kweri, Dar ker,
diviners, etcetera).
Within the Parish structure, there were typically three to five villages overseen by the Won Paco
(father of the home), a role that was introduced under colonial rule and did not exist in traditional political
systems. Additionally, the heads of commoner lineages, known as Ludito kaka, were not officially recognized
by the colonial administration but held informal acknowledgment from chiefs. Despite their traditional role of
overseeing village affairs, their involvement in governance was limited; only a few were selected by other Ludito
kaka to serve on the sub-county council.
45
The configuration of customary power in Acholi is summarized in the
annual report of the Provincial Commissioner of the Northern Province to the General Governor that:
All chiefs have been encouraged to engage their own clerks, who are Acholi educated at the local missions;
practically every chief has his clerk now, and lately a considerable number have commenced to tackle Tax
Registers. Houses of a more substantial and civilized type are being built by the chiefs, many of them own
bicycles, they all possess chief’s robes, and their police are now organized
46
.
The structure of colonial administration had also been tried in Teso and Lango where the British had imposed
Baganda chiefs to preside over native administration before local headmen were appointed to replace them due
to gross misconduct.
47
Unlike in Teso and Lango, however, the British combined their appointed chiefs (Rwodi
Kalam) with the anointed hereditary chiefs (Rwodi Moo) in Acholi.
54
These chiefs operated under the authority
of the British District Commissioner, illustrating the nuanced approaches taken by the British in utilizing
traditional leadership structures within different regions of Uganda to facilitate indirect rule. Because of the
unique governance structure of the Acholi and other segmentary ethnic groups in northern Uganda that set them
apart from the ‘centralized’ kingdoms of southern Uganda, they were governed under the District Council
institutionalized under the Native Authority Ordinance of 1949, rather than holding federal or semi-federal status
41
Laruni, Elizabeth. From the Village to Entebbe, 2014, p.199.
42
Ibid.
43
Bere, Rennie M. "An outline of Acholi history.”, p. 4.
44
Girling, Frank. The Acholi of Uganda, p.175.
45
Bere, Rennie M. "An outline of Acholi history." Uganda Journal11, no. 1 (1947): 1-8, p.8.
46
National Archives.A46/808 Secretary Minute Paper, no.2134. Northern province. Annual, Report, 1914-15.
47
Gartrell, Beverly. "British administrators, colonial chiefs, and the comfort of tradition: an example from Uganda." African Studies
Review 26, no. 1 (1983): 1-24, p.3; See Also; Vincent, Joan. "Colonial chiefs and the making of class: a case study from Teso, eastern
Uganda." Africa 47, no. 2 (1977): 140-159, p. 150.See also, Tignor, Robert L. "Clan Leaders and Colonial Chiefs in Lango: The
Political History of an East African Stateless Society, c. 1800-1939." (1980): 130-133, p.131; Tosh, John. "Colonial chiefs in a stateless
society: a case-study from Northern Uganda1." The Journal of African History14, no. 3 (1973): 473-490, p.140-41.
54
Mamdani,
Mahmood. Define and rule, 2012, p.9.
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025
Page 5366
www.rsisinternational.org
granted to the former. This distinction shaped the organization and reorganization of Native Administrative
structures in Acholi leading up to independence, reflecting the diverse governance systems existing within the
region and the nuances of colonial administration in different cultural contexts. With stereotypes and
misconception, the colonial authorities in Acholi implemented reforms that aimed at articulating and
rearticulating the Acholi customary authority and power structure based on their own colonial logic.
In terms of leadership, British officials circumscribed the chiefly authority and made it as the key symbol of
Acholi political authority, leaving out other ingredients of the same customary authority. This centralization of
chiefly power created opportunities for lower power holders like clan heads and elders to strengthen their
influence from the grassroots level, leading to a situation where the significance of the chief as a symbol of
customary authority dwindled. In this case, clan heads and elders instituted themselves as alternative center of
power to the chiefs. More importantly, circumscription weakened the power of chiefs by being isolated from the
network of customary actors (social bases) which they depended on in the pre-colonial period. It should be
recalled that in the pre-colonial period, clan heads and elders were the advisers of the chief and spokesperson of
their won clans in the chiefdom. The bondage between the chief and the lower power holders was broken by the
colonial actions. Furthermore, in the colonial administration's approach to Acholi leadership, hereditary chiefs
retained their ritual roles despite the centralization of power and integration into the native authority structure.
This paved way for the chiefs to keep in touch with his subjects and maintained loyalty from the chiefdoms and
clans. The hereditary chiefs, working with emerging Acholi elite took advantage of this gap to mobilize against
appointed chiefs in various chiefdoms, protesting the marginalization of the latter.
48
This created space for
indigenous people to engage in grassroots politics, dealing with important issues like conflict resolution,
marriage, land distribution, and spiritual/ritual matters that deeply impacted the Acholi community.
The colonial authorities seemed more focused on macro-level politics at the district level, neglecting these micro-
level concerns that were pivotal for the everyday lives of the Acholi people. This was problematic because in a
diffused political space with multiple centers of power like in Acholi, segregating the chiefly authority meant
weakening their social power base to perform efficiently. Indeed, colonial authorities were dissatisfied with the
performance of some chiefs, especially the hereditary ones who used to depend on customary structures to
perform their duties leading to their dismissal and suspension as well as replacing them with non-hereditary
leaders
49
. This shows that despite identifying the weaknesses of the hereditary chiefs, colonial officers did not
look at their action of reconfiguring customary authority as the problem for their poor performance. It was in
1938, when they resorted to follow the Acholi traditional system when chiefs started to perform satisfactorily. In
this connection, the Provincial Commissioner for Northern region in his annual report reported that the policy
adopted two years ago, of organizing the tribal administration on the basis of the Acholi clan system, and the
hereditary influence of the headmen, has been followed and developed, with results reported to be satisfactory
50
.
The limitation of colonial intervention is also seen from the lack of uniform system of local government in
Uganda
51
and in the contradictory and conflicting actions and positions of colonial officials in Acholi. Whereas
some colonial officials desired to introduce a completely new administrative system devoid of traditional
systems, others such as Bere the District Commissioner preferred a hybrid of the two. He was also opposed to
the creation of the paramount chief and the ideal of transferring chiefs outside their lineage roots. In 1943,
Protesting the plan to abandon the traditional systems in native administration, Bere noted that:
With any African tribe, full understanding of the indigenous system is of fundamental importance if a successful
reconstruction of its administrative machine is to be achieved; even a modern local government should be
designed to keep in touch with tradition.
52
The above extract resonates with Sir Henry Maine’s critics of the British officials in India for failure to
understand the customs of the natives and govern them according to these customs and traditions. To him the
48
Girling, Frank. The Acholi of Uganda. London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Offices (1960), p. 198.
49
Laruni, Elizabeth. From the Village to Entebbe, p. 68. See also National Archives.A46/808 Secretary Minute Paper, no.2134.
Northern Province Annual Report, 1914-15.
50
MUL/AS, Annual Report from Provincial Commissioner on Native Adminstration, Northern Province, 31
st
December 1938, p.27.
51
Karugire, Samwiri Rubaraza. "Roots of instability in Uganda." (No Title) (1996), p.25.
52
Bere, Land and chieftainship among the Acholi, p.52.
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025
Page 5367
www.rsisinternational.org
Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 was due to lack of understanding and knowledge of the logic of the native institutions
found in customs and traditions and how they could be utilized in colonial administration
53
. Maine, therefore,
suggested that the natives should be governed according to their customs. Consequently, officials appointed to
serve in the colonial offices overseas were trained in the doctrine of indirect rule before they were deployed.
Perhaps Bere was an apologist of Maine to whom Mamdani traces the origin of Indirect Rule
54
. Underpinning
Bere’s argument was the claim that “the position of the traditional chief is one of the great complexities, for he
must be a representative as well as a ruler of his people, not only the authority but also it is of vital importance
to any African administration and the welfare of the other people that this link should have not been broken.”
55
The limitation of the colonial system is also seen in the failure to contain clan identities and rivalries that
dominated the District council during the colonial period. Clan identities and clan rivalries continued to play a
significant role in the election of District council representatives in Acholi, as politicians often relied on their
clan affiliations to garner support. This underscored the influence of the clan system within the colonial
administration and highlighted the enduring importance of pre-colonial clan identities as a crucial aspect of social
and political life for many Acholi people. The ability to mobilize support based on clan allegiances demonstrated
how deeply entrenched these traditional social structures remained in the face of colonial interventions. As Leys
observed, the “sentiments for the thirty or so ‘old chiefdoms’, which the British tried to undermine by imposing
an administrative structure of six counties, was kept alive through competition for ‘status in the modern political
system.”
56
However, the above articulation has been critiqued by scholars such as Karugire and Kabwegyere
who emphasize the transformative character of the colonial structure in Uganda. Karugire and Kabwegyere argue
that the concept of indirect rule did not mean a total reliance on indigenous institutions. To Karugire, indirect
rule rested on a flawed premise as it depended on the assumption that colonies could be governed through their
pre-existing indigenous institutions and norms, even though colonialism had systematically weakened these
structures to facilitate the establishment of a new colonial order
57
. In brief, he argues that, even though indirect
rule sought to govern colonies through indigenous institutions, the underlying colonial influence remained
hidden within these so-called native spaces. The facade of autonomy and self-governance often masked the
continued manipulation and control exerted by colonial powers.
65
Kabwegyere agrees with Karugire and
observes that despite colonial administrative roles being filled at the intermediate level by Africans, it should not
be taken to mean that these Africans were performing these roles through pre-existing indigenous institutions.
In many cases, Kabwegyere argues, “the quasi-traditional institutions were in fact created by the British
colonialists, and this involved a process of social and political re-organization”
58
. In this case, colonial state
structure produced and influenced the agency of the native actors. Colonial structure conditioned the parameters
in which both new and old chiefs jostled for political influence, and thereby influenced the contestation by which
customary hierarchies were co-produced. The history of Acholi is intricately intertwined with the agency of
chiefs who played significant roles in aiding the colonial project in the region. Many Acholi chiefs who served
the colonial system were honored and those who critiqued the British were dishonoured.
The structure of Acholi customary authority imagined by the British was despotic and it laid the foundation for
native resistance. This is because the colonial system strengthened the authority of non-hereditary chiefs within
the colonial administration. The construction of customary authorities in Acholiland altered the nature of
customary roles and powers of customary chiefs. By reconfiguring the holders of power and the balance of power
between hereditary and non-hereditary chiefs who were reduced to cultural content, British colonial rule opened
53
Maine, Henry Sumner. The effects of observation of India on modern European thought: the Rede lecture delivered before the
University of Cambridge on May 22, 1875. John Murray, 1875, 216-217.
54
Mamdani, Mahmood. Define and rule: Native as political identity. Harvard University Press, 2012, p.9.
55
Bere, Rennie M. "An outline of Acholi history.", p.9.
56
Leys, Colin. "Politicians and policies: an essay on politics in Acholi, Uganda, 1962-65." (No Title) (1967), p.16.
57
Karugire, Samwiri Rubaraza. "Roots of instability in Uganda." (No Title) (1996), p.25.
65
Ibid.
58
Kabwegyere, Tarsis B. "The politics of state formation and destruction in Uganda." (No Title) (1995), p.74-75.
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025
Page 5368
www.rsisinternational.org
up opportunity for native resistance. Under indirect rule, the roles of colonial chiefs in Acholi shifted from
traditional ritualistic functions practiced in the precolonial period to colonial-sanctioned roles. The Native
Authority Ordinance of 1919 institutionalized the authority of colonial-appointed chiefs, positioning them as key
figures in the colonial administration's control and governance of indigenous populations. By consolidating
judicial, legislative, and executive powers in the hands of these chiefs, the ordinance perpetuated a system that
upheld colonial interests and subjugated subject populations.
Such a despotic legal framework highlights the intricate mechanisms through which colonial powersmaintained
dominance and exploited resources in colonized territories, ultimately shaping the social and political dynamics
of the time.
59
The specific roles included: presiding over customary courts, collecting taxes, and overseeing
administrative tasks such as mobilizing labour for public works, largely serving colonial interests.
60
This
transformation altered the nature of leadership in Acholi society, aligning the chiefs more closely with the
colonial administration and its objectives rather than solely focusing on upholding traditional customs and
practices. This resulted in isolation of hereditary chiefs from the community, weakening their traditional
legitimacy which has persisted in the contemporary moment. The configuration of customary authorities also
brought changes in the power of chiefs. However, the distribution of power was not uniform but varied between
hereditary and non-hereditary chiefs, with the latter granted excessive powers while the former lost significant
levels of power despite being allowed to perform their ritual functions. The despotic nature of Acholi chiefs was
documented by a number of scholars and alluded to by a number of informants, agreeing to the fact that colonial
chiefs were autocratic in their offices and tended to favour friends and close kin with or without the knowledge
or consent of the British officials.
69
For example, Girling who conducted research at the courts during the colonial
rule quoted an appointed Acholi chief as saying:
You see, we must rule by fear. The people are lazy, they do not realize what good things the government is doing
for them. How can we Acholi progress unless we grow cotton, pay our taxes and dig latrines as the government
wants us to do.
61
Similarly, Branch argues that it was such unqualified British support for colonial appointed chiefs who had no
customary rights to their offices, that made the colonial administration the target of resistance in Acholi,
62
It must
be emphasized that at every level of the colonial structure of the native administration in Acholi District, there
was a wide chasm between the government appointed chiefs and the traditional/ritual chiefs of the past polit ical
power. Generally, the appointed chiefs ruled through instilling fear in their subjects while hereditary chiefs
tended to uphold the pre-colonial non-violence approach. Configuration of customary authority also led to a
change in the nature of customary chiefs. There was a shift towards salaried colonial chiefs in Acholi which was
a departure from the traditional practice of hereditary leadership and the strict association of chiefs with specific
chiefdoms. This allowed for the transfer of chiefs like Eriya Aliker and Okello Mwaka to different administrative
units regardless of their lineage background. However, their relocation to Labongo and Puranga chiefdoms
respectively was met with resistance from the local population, highlighting the importance of traditional
legitimacy in performing ritual functions and the inherent challenges of imposing colonial-appointed chiefs in a
deeply rooted traditional society.
63
Another fundamental change in the native administration was the bringing on board youth mostly from
missionary educated elite to the helm of leadership. Younger individuals were given administrative roles due to
education requirements.
64
This shift created tension between the traditional elders, many of whom did not have
59
Mamdani, Mahmood. "Citizen and subject.", p.87; also see Branch, Adam. Displacing human rights: War and intervention in
northern Uganda. Oxford University Press, 2011, p.49.
60
Hopwood, Julian. "Elephants abroad and in the room: explicit and implicit security, justice and protection issues on the Uganda/S
Sudan border." London: London School of Economics, Justice and Security Research Programme Paper22 (2015), p.4.
69
Okot Billy,
Resurgence of Acholi Customary Authority), interviewed by Tony Apecu, June 2023, Pader District.
61
Girling, Frank. The Acholi of Uganda. London, p.185.
62
Branch, Adam. Displacing human rights: War and intervention in northern Uganda. Oxford University Press, 2011, p.49.
63
Okidi Ladwar (Resurgence of Acholi Customary Authority), interviewed by Tony Apecu, July 2023, Gulu City.
64
Ibid.
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025
Page 5369
www.rsisinternational.org
formal education, and the emerging educated class.
65
The clash between the old guard and the new generation
highlighted the complexities and challenges that arose from the changing dynamics within the leadership
hierarchy in Acholi under colonial rule.
The creation of the Lawirwodi (Paramount chief) marked a turning point as a form of resistance from below.
The Uganda African Local Government Ordinance of 1949 marked a significant shift in governance structure by
allowing one of the County Chiefs to become the chairperson of the District Councils instead of the District
Commissioner. This change presented challenges in appointing a Secretary General or President, particularly
considering the clan rivalries among the royal ancestral lineages of the County chiefs. Consequently, in 1950,
with the influence of Acholi elite in the District council, two positions were created; Lawirwodi (Paramount
chief) is the first among equals and Langolkop Madit (Chief Judge of the District Courts). The Lawirwodi, who
was to chair the District Council and acted as the Senior Executive Officer, was associated with the concept of
paramountcy, causing tension with the colonial administration as they specifically opposed the appointment of
leaders from the major rivalling chiefdoms of Payira and Padibe to this influential role
66
. As a result, district
councillors from among the County chiefs instead elected Matayo Lamot, the chief of Agago as Lawirwodi and
Yona Odida, Chief of Aswa as Langolkop Madit. There was increasing competition for the Lawirwodi post,
which aroused ‘considerable’ chiefdom rivalries
67
. In 1953, Mateo Lamot lost the position to Phillip Adonga,
County Chief of Chua, and the chief of Palwo Pajule.
The District Council was not, however, satisfied with the Lawirwodi post and still sought an executive district
head who would then be able to meet with the Kabaka of Buganda on an equal footing. Similarly, The District
Commissioner, R.M Bere, was also opposed to the idea of a paramount chief stating in 1949 that: “It will not be
permitted to try and make a sort of hereditary king whose family would become rulers. This would not be at all
in accordance with modern ideas and the intention of giving the people more say in their own government.”
68
Consequently, in 1959, after much debate between the Protectorate Government, the Ministry of Local
Government and the District Council, the Lawirwodi position was abolished and a ceremonial head, entitled
Laloyo Maber (good ruler), was created
69
. The establishment of the Laloyo Maber position was motivated by
several factors. Firstly, it was a response to the constitutional requirement by the colonial administration for each
region to have a Constitutional Head in anticipation of independence, akin to the creation of the Won Nyaci in
Lango. Secondly, concerns within the District Council over the potential hereditary nature of the Lawirwodi title
prompted the change. Additionally, the election of Phillip Adonga, a central figure from Pajule, aimed to address
these rivalry concerns by positioning someone from a central location between east and west of Acholi,
potentially alleviating tensions between chiefdoms in these regions. It should be emphasized that the position of
the Laloyo maber transcended the conventional roles of the chiefs in Acholi, as the position holder was elevated
to a cultural and political figurehead with centralized political powers that far surpassed those of a native chief.
However, the intention for Laloyo Maber to transcend clan rivalries did not fully succeed in doing so. Chiefly
power and clan loyalties were still an essential part of Acholi polity. Public support and clan ties meant that
chiefs could not simply be dismissed and contained politically to the periphery. Similarly, the Laloyo Maber
post, although non-executive, once again sparked considerable rivalry, particularly amongst the major clan heads.
It is noteworthy that the creation of constitutional district heads in Uganda reflected a desire to emulate Buganda's
administrative autonomy and political system, particularly the institution of the Kabaka.
70
Leys observed that
Buganda's dominant position had sparked envy among other regions in the country, leading them to aspire to a
comparable level of self-governance and traditional leadership structure.
71
Furthermore, Councils known as
Lukiiko (Bantu term for council or parliament) introduced in various regions of Uganda to facilitate regular
meetings among chiefs, with gatherings in Gulu scheduled for the first Monday of each month, aiming to
65
Ibid.
66
Ibid, p.32.
67
Behrend, Heike. "Lakwena, Alice." In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of African History. 2020, p.18.
68
Bere, Rennie M. "An outline of Acholi history.", p.8.
69
Okidi Ladwar (Resurgence of Acholi Customary Authority), interviewed by Tony Apecu, July 2023, Gulu City.
70
Ibid.
71
Apter, David E. The political kingdom in Uganda: a study in bureaucratic nationalism. Routledge, 2013, p.
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025
Page 5370
www.rsisinternational.org
guarantee the efficient communication of directives from colonial administrations
72
. However, the Lukiiko lacked
legislative authority and could not solely modify native traditions and laws. This was contingent upon approval
from the Governor, implying their influence was constrained in terms of power and jurisdiction.
73
This trend
highlights the influence of Buganda's political arrangements on the broader aspirations of other regions within
Uganda.
74
It is important to state from the outset that the nature of colonial rule shaped the nature of native resistance. In
Acholi, colonization was marked by a combination of violent and passive resistance strategies. The resistance
put up by the Acholi was a response to the specific challenges and disruptions brought about by colonial rule,
particularly the restructuring of customary authorities and attempts to disarm the population. The Lamogi
rebellion during 1911-1912 underlined the depth of this resistance, reflecting the complexities and difficulties
faced by colonizers in trying to subdue traditional societies. The people of Lamogi chiefdom objected to the
planned disarmament exercise to rid Acholi of guns acquired from Arab slave and ivory traders. They perceived
the disarmament as depriving them of instruments of power and making them vulnerable to external attacks. In
another development, Chief Awich of Payira defiantly resisted British attempts to subjugate his chiefdom by
refusing to sign treaties. This was compounded by the British action of signing a treaty with his rival chief
Ogwok of Padibe. Awich's staunch opposition led to him mobilizing 5000 men to combat British troops, resulting
in his capture and subsequent exile in 1901
75
.
The restructuring of Acholi customary authority under colonial rule which involved the disbandment of non-
collaborative chiefdoms, the arrest of rebellious chiefs, the dismissal of chiefs deemed detrimental to the new
order, and the appointment of non-hereditary chiefs to replace them was key trigger of resistance as indicated
below. Indeed, chiefs Eriya Aliker from Payira chiefdom and Okello Mwaka who were transferred to Labongo
and Puranga chiefdoms respectively were rejected by the people, on the account that no chief rules over other
chiefdoms where he had no traditional legitimacy of performing ritual functions
76
. Okello Mwaka who was a
very close ally of colonial officials was eventually killed by the people of Puranga. The people of Labongo
rejected Chief Eriya who hailed from the rivalling chiefdom of Payira. His presence was perceived as promoting
the Payira paramountcy over them
86
. For example, working with the District Commissioner Wright, chief Aliker
ordered for the confiscation of cattle belonging to the Labongo people and forced them to provide forced labour
on public roads. Early on, Payira auxiliaries working with British army officer Wagstaff attacked, killed and
confiscated Labongo cattle
77
.
Other chiefdoms that resisted administrative re-organization include Alero which resisted merger with Koch
chiefdom. The people of Paimol in eastern Acholi also resisted British imposition of leaders over them leading
to the ‘Paimol uprising’ of 1918, following the killing of chief Lakidi and replacing him with Amet, the chief of
the neighbouring Lira, Amiel
78
. Amet’s appointment drew outrage in Acholi for two reasons: being an outsider
from the chiefdom and being a leper. To the Acholi a leper is an outcast in society and appointing one as a leader
was perceived as bringing a curse into the society. Other affected chiefs include the chief of Atiak who was
deposed in 1927 for failure to carry out government orders, and was replaced by Zakariya Atoyo from Patiko
chiefdom, rendering the lineage leadership to end at that time. In some instances, some humiliating punishments
72
Gertzel, Cherry J. "Party and locality in Northern Uganda, 1945-1962." (No Title) (1974), p.19.
73
Bere, Rennie M. "Land and Chieftainship among the Acholi." Uganda Journal 19, no. 1 (1955): 49-5, p.50-52.
74
Paine, Clare. "Ker Kwaro Acholi." A Re-Invention of Traditional Authority in Northern (2014), p.46.
75
Laruni, Elizabeth. From the Village to Entebbe:, p.69.
76
Odoi-Tanga, Fredrick. "Politics, ethnicity and conflict in post independent Acholiland, 2010, p.108.
86
Girling, Frank. The Acholi of Uganda, p. 198.
77
Dwyer, John Orr. The Acholi of Uganda, 1972, p.164; See also Odoi-Tanga, Fredrick. "Politics, ethnicity and conflict in post
independent Acholiland, Uganda 1962-2006."p.107.
78
Dwyer, John Orr. The Acholi of Uganda: Adjustment to Imperialism. Columbia University, 1972, p.108.
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025
Page 5371
www.rsisinternational.org
were handed out to these traditional rulers for trivial offences
79
. For example, the ruler of Pajule chiefdom called
Aliker was put in latrine pit by the District Commissioner, and he died soon after
80
.
The resistance to colonial rule in Acholi and other parts of Uganda was also attributed to the character/agency
of individuals, especially the appointed chiefs who held excessive power and became autocratic and despotic in
their administration. In Acholi and Karamoja, chief Okello Mwaka of Puranga
81
and chief Achia of Nabilatuk
elders
82
. were killed by the locals respectively. Achia and other chiefs became unpopular for making petty by-
laws and using their power to impose imprisonment for long time and going against personalized authority of
clan elders. Chief Okello Mwaka was a close ally of British officials in Acholi and was viewed by the locals as
an imposter. Commenting on the killing of Okello Mwaka, the District Commissioner Postlethwaite wrote:
“our warrant chief Okello Mwaka became very unpopular and was murdered by his enemies… I tried these
murderers sentencing four for long imprisonment and four to death”
83
.
Generally, the imposition of non-hereditary chiefs among the Acholi was not well-received, especially by the
hereditary chiefs and their clans. The giving of guns as rewards for chiefs who cooperated with British
administrators allowed for a new form of coercion that helped strengthen not only their own authority but also
the authority of the parties they represented. This resonates with Branch’s claim that it was such unqualified
British support for colonial appointed chiefs who had no customary rights to their offices, would eventually
make the colonial administration the target of resistance in Acholi.
The provision of guns provided a means for these intermediaries to assert control and influence in their
interactions with both the British officials and the communities they served, displaying the complex dynamics
at play within these power structures. The foregoing paragraph speaks to the claim by Tosh and Vincent that
contestations and the resistance were triggered by the ways in which colonial authorities reconfigured customary
power, giving appointed chiefs excessive power over other elements of the same customary authority. In this
connection, Tosh refers to this configuration of chiefly power as a fiction, self-deception and misperception on
the part of colonial administrators. This resonates with the exposition of Vincent that “colonial officials did not
recognize the nature of the indigenous political power, misinterpreted local institutions and found in them a
generalized uniformity”. Such configurations of power made resistance from below inevitable because it was
not based on traditional legitimacy. They failed to recognize clan elders were the ‘true representative of the local
people, deriving their authority from traditional social organization’ rather than the appointed chiefs.
Moreover, instances of abuse within the new system were documented, with chiefs engaging in nepotism and
showing favouritism towards specific clans in appointments and service delivery. These actions often led to
conflicts and contestations between the chiefs and their subjects. The Acholi displayed a keen awareness in
distinguishing between Rwodi kalam and Rwodi moo. These two categories of chiefs were distinctly separated
within the colonial administrative framework, with the latter (Rwodi moo) maintaining authority based on lineage
rituals and historical political power within their communities. It is noteworthy, that whereas the non-hereditary
chiefs gained excessive power in colonial indirect rule, the hereditary chiefs significantly lost power despite
being allowed to continue with ritual functions. In this regard, Girling observes by 1937, “the privileges and the
power of the chiefs had declined too far to be revived.” In response to colonial suppression and the imposition
of despotic state-appointed chiefs, hereditary chiefs in alliance with the emerging petty bourgeoisie sought to
challenge this power dynamic by joining political parties (DP and UPC) as a means to unify their collective
interests and increase Acholi representation in national politics. This alliance aimed to address the
79
Karugire, Samwiri Rubaraza. "A political history of Uganda." (2010), p.125.
80
Ibid.
81
Kabwegyere, Tarsis B. The politics of state formation and destruction in Uganda, p. 5.
82
Mamdani, M., P. M. B. Kasoma, and A. B. Katende. "Karamoja: Ecology and History. Centre for Basic Research Working Paper No.
22." Kampala: CBR Publications (1992), p.30.
83
Postlethwaite, John Rutherford Parkin (1947): I Look Back, p.64.
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025
Page 5372
www.rsisinternational.org
marginalization of traditional chiefs and rural Acholi by strategically leveraging political power and advocating
for a more inclusive and representative governance structure within the Acholi community.
At the grassroot level, with the separation of chiefly power from other traditional leaders, lineage heads and
elders formed a parallel power centre and marginalized the colonial chiefs as a counter measure. This dynamic
has persisted into the contemporary moment with clan leaders and elders increasingly assuming more authority
and influence, effectively supplanting the role of the chiefs. This shift highlights the adaptation and resilience of
Acholi societal structures in response to external pressures and attempts at manipulation by colonial and post-
colonial authorities. There was also resistance at the District Council in which councillors with the support of
some colonial officials, particularly Bere objected to the institution of the Lawirwodi (paramount chiefs) as the
Constitutional Head of Acholi District. They instead pushed for the creation of the Laloyo Maber (good leader)
with no strict adherence to traditional hereditary leadership. The District Commissioner, R.M Bere, was also
opposed to the idea of a paramount chief stating in 1949
84
Resistance against the colonial establishment of chiefly power was also evident among non-chiefly groups
including the emerging class of mission-educated youth who sought representation in local government
structures. The Young Acholi Association (YAA), formed in 1921, echoed the calls for reform made by other
youth associations like Young Baganda Youth Association. The YAA's quest for political change and inclusion
within the Native Administration highlighted the youth's aspiration for recognition as a separate political entity.
Viewing the District Council as a platform to address grievances against the traditional gerontocratic social order,
the Acholi youth aimed to challenge societal hierarchies based on age, marital status, and gender. This resonates
with the view of Laruni that in considering chiefs for appointment, colonial authorities gave priority to
missionary educated elite and this created contestations between the educated group and uneducated traditional
leaders.
Whereas colonial reform came to represent a more consensual form of rule than coercion, it was conceived as a
resistance to colonial contradictions. Nevertheless, reform occurred in the context of colonial stability. It is
crucial to recognize that while resistance efforts in Acholi did not hinder colonial projects significantly, there
were some reforms and adaptations made in response to the resistance. For instance, colonial administrators were
compelled to make frequent configurations and reconfigurations of the Native Administration not only to
promote efficiency and reduce cost but also making the administration acceptable to the indigenous people. To
avoid further resistance, in 1936, the British opted to implement a completely hereditary system of clan chiefs
within the Acholi Native Authority by giving chiefs areas that roughly coincided with pre-colonial clan
boundaries, resulting in around fifty such divisions. This is seen in the Annual provincial report in 1930 that:
“with amalgamation of the two Districts, an opportunity was taken to reorganize the native administration on
lines more approximating to the Acholi tribal system of hereditary and less on the Baganda system of a
bureaucratic civil service”
95
. District Commissioners could now turn to District Council for advice on all tribal
matters. It is interesting to note that colonial authorities were now not only getting advice from the people they
originally despised but also appreciating that the traditional political system was effective as noted by the same
annual provincial report. It states that “the policy adopted two years ago, of organizing the tribal administration
on the basis of the Acholi clan system, and the hereditary influence of the headmen, has been followed and
developed, with results reported to be satisfactory”
85
.
Critically, we can interpret this change as a matter of colonial political strategy because such tribalization was
meant to orient an emerging native political elite into a tribal consciousness that would resonate with the
nationalist project. The deployment of tribal identity by the Acholi elite at a national level, particularly in
response to the emergence of political parties like the Democratic Party (DP) and Uganda People's Congress
(UPC), reflects a strategic tool used to advance their agenda and assert their influence. In a bid to compete with
84
Bere, Rennie M. "Land and Chieftainship among the Acholi." Uganda Journal 19, no. 1 (1955): 49-5, p.50-52.
95
Annual Provincial Report, 1930.
85
96 Ibid.
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025
Page 5373
www.rsisinternational.org
Buganda's privileged position, the Acholi elite positioned themselves within the national political landscape by
asserting tribal claims to counter existing power structures and challenge the dominance of other regions.
Colonial reconfiguration of Acholi customary authority culminated into its instability with a strong legacy in the
contemporary moment. Since the configuration of customary authority in the colonial period, the institutions of
customary authority in Acholi have been unstable characterized by resistance, instability and significant decline
in political power and influence of chiefs. Many of the implications from this legacy can be teased from the
creation of a new elite class. By reconfiguring customary power, colonial authority created space for the rise of
a new class of Acholi individuals primarily from commoner backgrounds. These individuals referred by Laruni
as petty bourgeoisies manifested both a social and economic consequence arising from the colonial constructs.
This class was socially and economically empowered, and they found themselves increasingly detached from
the traditional societal values and structures. This shift highlights the profound impact of colonial rule on social
dynamics within the Acholi community, leading to the emergence of a distinct class with altered perspectives
and connections to traditional norms and systems. It is this class that championed the Acholi ethnic interest at
the district and national levels. It is important to note that the colonial politics of ethnicization was also avenue
for anti-colonialism as the Acholi mobilized the same created tribal identity to demand for its interest at the
national levels. On the whole, the foregoing chapter has highlighted critical aspects that resonate with the central
claim of this thesis. Colonial reconfiguration of Acholi social, cultural, economic, and political spaces
concretized into social fabric and significantly altered the existing forms of sociality and political culture.
Through the ethnicization of a restricted homeland, the colonial state ensured that chiefly positions became
contestations both from society and above, yet the idea of the homeland spoke to an already curtailed political
field. Consequently, the colonial politics of define, divide and rule continued to manifest in social spaces, leading
to conflict and social strife, morphing into political constituencies.
This article is the outcome of a mixed methods research approach. Field work, involving interviews, focused
group discussions, participant observation, visits to archives and other libraries, was conducted between January
to December 2023. Archival visits were done at the District and missionary archives located in Gulu city. In
Kampala, I visited the archive of Makerere University (Africana section) and the National archive in Wandegeya.
This archival research was intended to highlight the logic that informed historical constructions of customary
power and authority in Acholi. The reports on the communications between colonial officials and the customary
chiefs revealed rich insights into the nature and character of the relationship between both domains. Missionary
archives also proved useful in highlighting how first European contacts imagined Luo communities. Local
government archives in Gulu city and in Kampala archives proved critical in revealing the internal discussions
about the formation of Ker Kwaro Acholi (KKA) as a cultural institution of the Acholi people and their
subsequent relationships with the local government structures and other humanitarian agencies and NGOs
operating in Acholiland.
Interviews conducted in the course of the year 2023 amounted to forty-five (45). Discussions with respondents
purposely chosen from different categories of people whose work had a close relationship with the chiefly
authorities in the eight (8) districts constituting Acholiland. Interviews were conducted with chiefs representing
the chiefdoms of Pagak, Lamogi, Pabbo, Parabongo, Paibona, Patiko Pageya, Aria, Alero and Koch Goma in
western Acholi and chiefdoms of Agoro Tee Got, Ogole, Labongo Amida , Koyo, Adilang and Pajule chiefdoms
in eastern Acholi. The inclusion of various chiefs from different chiefdoms was intended to provide a rich
understanding of the historical migration patterns into Acholi region and to also ensure an inclusive interpretation
of the internal differentiations in customs and traditional practices. The interviews was organized to target both
those chiefs involved with Ker Kwaro Acholi and those who contest the institution; only this inclusion would
provide alternative opinions about the true perceptions surrounding the institution. Other interviews were
conducted with civil servants, politicians, elders councils, media talk show hosts, NGO representatives, officials
from the ministry of gender, academicians, and some leaders of social civil society organizations.
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025
Page 5374
www.rsisinternational.org
Focused group discussions were also conducted with different categories of people including: clan heads,
women, rwodi Kweri, and youth groups. Respondents in the FGD were sampled using the snowball approach
and participants identified purposefully. Participant observation was also important during the field work
exercise. Important observations were made when I participated in two events to bury two chiefs who passed
away. During this occasion, I observed some changes in the Acholi burial practices and the politicization of
customary practices, as manifested in the speech ceremonies. I also attended four press conferences called by
the two factions of Ker Kwaro Acholi following leadership wrangles which emerged during the research and I
closely followed the unfolding events in the media. These pressers enabled me to discover the invisible
discourses being appropriated by the paramount chief, council of chiefs and officials of Ker Kwaro Acholi to
legitimate their positions and personal interests. The contestations between the two conflicting factions of chiefs
helped to reveal information that had been hidden from the researcher and also not known in the public domain.
1. Annual Provincial Report, 1930.
2. MUL/AS, Annual Report from Provincial Commissioner on Native Administration, Northern
Province, 31
st
December 1938, p.27
3. MUL/AS, Annual Report from Provincial Commissioner on Native Administration, Northern
Province, 31
st
December 1937.
4. National Archives.A46/808 Secretary Minute Paper, no.2134. Northern province. Annual, Report,
191415.
1. Interview with OM, May 2023, Kitgum District.
2. Interview with OB, June 2023, Pader District.
3. Interview with OL, July 2023, Gulu City.
4. Interview with SO, July 2023, Nwoya District.
1. Amone, Charles, "Colonialism and the creation of Acholi ethnic identity in Uganda, 1894 to 1962." MA
Dissertation, Makerere University, 2004.
2. Anywar, Reuben Stephen. "The life of rwot Iburaim Awich." Uganda Journal 12, no. 1 (1948): 72-81.
3. Apter, David E. The political kingdom in Uganda: a study in bureaucratic nationalism. Routledge, 2013.
4. Atkinson, Ronald R. The Roots of Ethnicity: The Origins of the Acholi of Uganda Before 18. University
of Pennsylvania Press, 2015.
5. Branch, Adam. Displacing human rights: War and intervention in northern Uganda. Oxford University
Press, 2011.
6. Bere, Rennie M. "An outline of Acholi history." Uganda Journal1 Vol 11, no. 1 (1947).
7. Behrend, Heike. "Lakwena, Alice." In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of African History. 2020.
8. Crowder, Michael. "Indirect rule—French and British style." Africa 34, no. 3 (1964), 197-205.
9. Dwyer, John Orr. The Acholi of Uganda: Adjustment to Imperialism. Columbia University, 1972, p61-
62.
10. Finnström, Sverker. Living with bad surroundings: War, history, and everyday moments in northern
Uganda. Duke University Press, 2008.
11. Gray, John Milner. "Acholi history, 1860-1901." Uganda Journal 15 (1951): 121-143.
12. Gartrell, Beverly. "British administrators, colonial chiefs, and the comfort of tradition: an example from
Uganda." African Studies Review 26, no. 1 (1983): 1-24
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025
Page 5375
www.rsisinternational.org
13. Hopwood, Julian. "Elephants abroad and in the room: explicit and implicit security, justice and protection
issues on the Uganda/S Sudan border." London: London School of Economics, Justice and Security
Research Programme Paper 22 (2015).
14. Jean and John Comaroff (1992), ‘Home Made Hegemony: Modernity Domesticity and Colonialism in
South Africa’, In Karen Hansen (ed.) African Encounter with Domesticity. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers
University Press.
15. Kabwegyere, Tarsis B. "The politics of state formation and destruction in Uganda." Fountain:
16. Kampala, (1995).
17. Khapoya, V.B., The African Experience: An Introduction, Longman, 2010, p.10.
18. Komujuni, Sophie. "To be a chief and to remain a chief: The Production of Customary Authority in
PostPost Conflict Northern Uganda." PhD diss., Ghent University, 2019.
19. Ingham, Kenneth. The making of modern Uganda. Routledge, 2023.
20. Laruni, Elizabeth. From the Village to Entebbe: The Acholi of Northern Uganda and the Politics of
Identity, 1950-1985. University of Exeter (United Kingdom).
21. Leys, Colin. "Politicians and policies: an essay on politics in Acholi, Uganda, 1962-65." (No Title)
(1967), p.16.
22. Maine, Henry Sumner. The effects of observation of India on modern European thought: the Rede lecture
delivered before the University of Cambridge on May 22, 1875. John Murray, 1875, 216-217.
23. Mamdani, Mahmood Citizen and Subject. Princeton University Press, 2018.
24. Define and rule: Native as political identity. Harvard University Press, 2012.
25. Moorehead, Alan. "The White Nile." (1960), p.68; see also, Laruni, Elizabeth. From the Village to
Entebbe: The Acholi of Northern Uganda and the Politics of Identity, 1950-1985. University of Exeter
(United Kingdom), 2014.
26. Mudoola, Dan M. "Religion, ethnicity, and politics in Uganda." (No Title) (1996).
27. Odoi-Tanga, Fredrick. "Politics, ethnicity and conflict in post independent Acholiland, Uganda
19622006." PhD diss., University of Pretoria, 2010.
28. Otim, Patrick W. "Local Intellectuals: Lacito Okech and the Production of Knowledge in Colonial
Acholiland." History in Africa 45 (2018): 275-305.
29. p'Bitek, Okot. Song of Lawino. Vol. 2. East African Publishers, 1995.
30. Paine, Clare. "Ker Kwaro Acholi." A Re-Invention of Traditional Authority in Northern (2014), p.53.
31. Postlethwaite, John Rutherford Parkin (1947): I Look Back. London: T. V. Boardman.
32. Ranger, Terence. "The invention of tradition revisited: the case of colonial Africa." In Legitimacy and
the State in Twentieth-century Africa, pp. 62-111. Palgrave Macmillan, London, 1993.
33. Tignor, Robert L. "Clan Leaders and Colonial Chiefs in Lango: The Political History of an East African
Stateless Society, c. 1800-1939." (1980): 130-133.
34. Tosh, John. "Colonial chiefs in a stateless society: a case-study from Northern Uganda1." The Journal of
African History14, no. 3 (1973): 473-490, p.140-41.
35. Vincent, Joan. "Colonial chiefs and the making of class: a case study from Teso, eastern Uganda." Africa
47, no. 2 (1977): 140-159.
36. Wild, John Vernon. "Early travelers in Acholi." (No Title)(1954).
