International Journal of Academic Research ISSN: 2348-7666; Vol.4, Issue-7, July, 2017 Impact Factor: 6.023; Email: [email protected]

Socio-cultural conditions and Economic activities and its Dynamics among the Gumuz Communities, in State of Benishangul-Gumuz region. Abebe Ano Alula (M.A.) Lecturer at department of Civic and Ethical studies, , Assosa University

Abstract : The Gumuz is one of the groups of the people, who are living in Metekkel administrative Zone of Benishangul-Gumuz Regional state. They have different cultural, economic and social practices that distinct them from others. This study aimed to assess and outline Socio-cultural institutions and Economic conditions of the Gumuz people and its dynamics in the region/Metekkel/, Northwestern Ethiopia, in state of Benishangul-Gumuz region. It attempted to analysis the Social organization of the Gumuz society as well as traditional beliefs system. Furthermore, the study try to outline Marriage and kinship and modes of livelihoods of Gumuz people. Finally, study also high-light on the geographic and background of ethnic settings of the people in the region. The paper aims to contribute to the understanding of the Socio-cultural institution and Economic conditions of the Gumuz society Keywords: Gumuz, cultural Practice, Socio-cultural institutions, Economic Activities, Traditional belief, Marriage and Kinship, Social organization, Metekkel, Benishangul- Gumuz

The Background and the Rational of the dynamics in the region, it is important to Study. The study of Socio-cultural high-light on the geographic and institutions and Economic Activities background of ethnic settings of the among the Gumuz Communities, people. Metekkel is the research area Northwestern Ethiopia is the main focus located in northwestern Ethiopia on the of this paper. In order to understand the Ethio-Sudanese border (see map below) Socio-cultural institutions and Modes of and in which majority of the Gumuz Livelihoods of the people and its settled there for Millennia.

A sketch Map of Study area (Metekkel) Source: Adopted from Wolde-selassie Abbute, Gumuz and Highland Settlers: Different Strategies of Livelihood and Ethnic Relations in Metekkel, Northwestern Ethiopia (2002:56)

  International Journal of Academic Research ISSN: 2348-7666; Vol.4, Issue-7, July, 2017 Impact Factor: 6.023; Email: [email protected]

Metekkel is may be also described as a Much of the land in Metekkel is special platform for social relations and abundant which makes it attractive to cultural integration. It has brought different settler community in addition to together a Mosaic of divers’ ethnic groups early inhabitants (Shinasha and Gumuz) who have continually been intermingling until recently. These include the Agaw, among themselves, the most important of Oromo, Amhara and others like Wolayta, which are Gumuz, Shinasha Agaw, Hadiya, Kambata and Gurage who were Oromo and Amhara. Since the emergence brought to the region as a result of the of Resettlement programme of the resettlement program of the Military 1984/5, the region was further enriched Government in 1984/5(Tsega, 2002a,: 2). by addition of other groups including the MATERIALS AND METHODS Hadiya and Kambata. It can be stated that the Members of the four Ethiopian Sources: The study is based on primary language families (Semitics, Cushitic, and secondary sources. The primary Omotic and Nilo-Saharan) are sources have been obtained from represented in this region and forming informants and personal observations “Ethiopia in Miniature” (Tsega Endalew: which were collected during a brief study 2006: 15) tour of Metekkel from the end of January to April 2017. Geographically, Metekkel is bordered with Gonder in the North, Wollega in the METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY: south, in the east, and the The data for this study were collected at in the west. During the Imperial and , Dibati, and Wombera Därg regimes, Metekkel was one of the Districts in Metekkel. The data to this districts of Gojjam province. Moreover, study were collected by qualitative data Metekkel is consisted of sub-districts collecting methods. The primary data which are known as Gwangwa, , were collected through interviews with Dangur, , Dibati and Wombera. elders of study areas. Although it difficult Due to political changes in 1991, to confidently to accept oral information Metekkel was placed under Region Six. as perfect, I carefully checked and Later, the Benishangul-Gumuz Region. counter-checked with secondary sources But sub-districts like Gwangwa and some available different offices in State of parts of Dibati (Mentawuha) were placed Benishangul-Gumuz Region. within the State of Amhara Region (Tsega Endalew: 2002a:2.) RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS Metekkel is very rich in natural resources Background to study people like gold, coffee, animal skins, civet, ivory The Gumuz is one of the groups of the and minerals. Marable and gold are people, who are living in various districts largely obtained in the region. However, of Metekkel and Kamashi administrative because of the physical features of the Zone of Benishangul-Gumuz Regional area, these minerals are not effectively state. They have different cultural, exploited and used. Metekkel is a place economic and social practices and where we can find a variety of animal settlement patterns that distinct them species like elephants, giraffes, monkeys, from others. lions, buffaloes, apes, ostriches and others (Abdussamad H. Ahmad: 1988: 2).

  International Journal of Academic Research ISSN: 2348-7666; Vol.4, Issue-7, July, 2017 Impact Factor: 6.023; Email: [email protected]

According to Taddase Tamarat, the (Qolla) areas. According to James, the Gumuz people are among the earliest Blue Nile valley inhabited by the Gumuz inhabitants of the Metekkel and to be a narrow corridor of low, originally occupied extensive territory undulating country penetrating the heart that extended to the shores of Lake Tana of Ethiopia and sandwiched between the and the Abbay basin from where they high plateaus of Wollega and Gojjam were forced by the neighboring people. At (Wendy James 1976:28). present most of the Gumuz people are Linguistically, the Gumuz belong to the living in the hot lowlands of Metekkel Koman group of central-Sudanic branch (Taddase Tamarat, in the Nilo-Saharan language family In the same way, Tsega Endale states (Ibid: 40). According to Unseth, is a Nilo- that the Gumuz occupied an extensive Saharan language of western Ethiopia territory along the Sudanese border and eastern Sudan, found along Blue Nile extending from in the north to and further north (Unseth; 1985:929). the Dhedheessa valley and Anger River in The Gumuz have their own distinctive Wollega. They have the tradition that socio-cultural institutions and modes of their areas extended to the shores of Livelihoods. According to available data Lake Tana and Agawumedir since time in study areas some social conditions, immemorial until they were apparently economic activities and the emerging pushed westwards by the neighboring changes started since 1960s as a people confining them to the hot landmark. This time was marked by the lowlands of Metekkel. Based on the expansion of central government political available data, it can be hypothesized power to the Gumuz periphery with the that the Gumuz might have originally establishment of its various institutions lived on large area in Gojjam and it paved the way for the arrival of Agawumedir including Dangla and spontaneous settlers in the region. It also Kosober areas (Tsega Endale 2006; 15). contributed to further encroachment of This is evidenced according to Wendy peoples from different regions to the land James, considers the documentary resources of the Gumuz area. The episode accounts of early scholars such as Henery facilitated greater interaction among the Salt and Charles T. Beke who had peoples that played significant role in the witnessed the fact that the Gumuz lived emerging socio-cultural and economic in the highlands of the present central dynamics among the Gumuz people. and southern parts of Gojjam in the 18th and 19th centuries. These accounts try to Social Organization of the people point out that due to population pressure Families, Neighborhood/commune and they gradually pushed to lowlands in the clan/ far western periphery of the country looking for greater safety (Wendy James There is consensus among scholars that 1986:121). Kinship is a complex system of culturally defined social relationships based on The Gumuz also live in the Sudan in the Marriage and Birth. They agreed that territories adjacent to Ethiopia Kinship is the basis of group formation, particularly on the hills around Famaka relationships between individuals are and Roseires (ibid: 16). Thus, the Gumuz governed mainly by kinship norms, and mostly inhabit the lowland climate

  International Journal of Academic Research ISSN: 2348-7666; Vol.4, Issue-7, July, 2017 Impact Factor: 6.023; Email: [email protected] the extension of kinship ties is the main Inside a family, girls learn the way of allying groups to one another and responsibilities of their mothers; whereas incorporating strangers into a group. boys learn the activities of their fathers. This is the case among the Gumuz A family, usually including co-wives, society. shares food from the same dish and dines together. In the case of a polygynous A Family is the most important basic family, the co-wives either cook together social institution among the Gumuz. The or pull their food in one of the homes and husband, wife/wives and children form eat together. However, the husband part of the extended families. The head of prepares separate crop fields for each. the family is the husband. Infants and The Harvest will also be stored in the children are taken care closely by the respective wife’s separate granary. The mother. Polygyny is quite common husband fairly shares his working time in among the people. At an early stage, after each wife’s field in order to prevent any the marriage of a junior wife, co-wives conflict that might arise among them. In usually share the same house. The most cases, all the extended members of a husband usually builds a separate house family share the same nearby compound for the junior wife/wives after the latter forming a hamlet. Mostly, a grandfather, have a number of children. In the father, co-wives, sons and daughter in- absence of the husbands, the senior wife laws live in a hamlet. Very close kin will be in charge, supervising the junior members of living parents form the wife/wives. Customarily, Gumuz senior closest neighborhood. The neighborhood wife, taking charge and push their distance increases with the growing husbands to marry junior wife/wives, distance of blood relations. Several taking charge of organizing and hamlets form neighborhood or village facilitating the wedding (Wolde-selassie commune (Wolde-selassie Abbute 2002: Abbute 2002; 66-7). 66-7). This is because the new wives are A commune/group home/ is a very considered to be instrumental in important social unit among the Gumuz. strengthening the family labor and Members of the same neighborhood seem sharing the care of the husbands. to be ideally egalitarian in nature. They Additionally, children begotten from perform all field cultivation activities polygynous marriage increase the together, facilitated by elders. They share number of Members of the family, which closely in all aspects of the village life. is considered as an important status They also drink together Keya (local symbol and security. Budge notes the brew), prepared on rotating basis. Most of experience of polygyny among the group the time, they pool their labor. The generally referred to Gumuz as “The neighborhood wives gather and fish Polygamy of the Gumuz is not the result together. When the distance of the village of lust on the part of the Man, but of the increases far from the shifting cultivation Women, who wish their husbands to have fields, the whole neighborhood moves to a large families for the sake of the new site. Through time, a neighborhood protection which many children give” grows and splits into more neighborhoods (Budge 1928: 629). (ibid).

  International Journal of Academic Research ISSN: 2348-7666; Vol.4, Issue-7, July, 2017 Impact Factor: 6.023; Email: [email protected]

A Gumuz clan is mostly composed of its 126). Accordingly, the people were known different neighborhood members related and called after the name of the territory by descent along patrilineal lines. The they inhabited as: The Gumuz of clan is a symbol of identity for its Manbuk, of Mandura, Gumuz Dibati, members. The clan territory is strongly Gumuz Guba and so on. Each territorial defended by the members against group was divided into several distinct outsiders. Inter-clan relations are held clans that had their own definite lands with mutual recognition according to and area of authority. Wolde-selassie also customs. Violation of such recognition supports this idea of clan territory as an results in inter-clan feuds. Members of important unit in the Gumuz’s closer kin groups live in villages inside perception of territoriality. He states that the clan territory. According to the local “Members belonging to the same clan are criteria, appropriate village locations are common owners of the territory and its selected by elders on the basis of the resources which is strongly defended and suitability of the site both in vegetation preserved by its members” (Wolde and soil types. They accordingly shift Selassie Abbute2002:67). Geographical their village sites on the basis of the features like rivers and streams, hill and distance and locations of their cultivation mountain, large old trees (sometimes fields as well as other causes related to marked by cuts on the branches) and big their traditional belief system. In stones; roads and footpaths marked the addition, a number of a clans of the boundary of a clan territory (Ibid). respective territories form larger broader In other hand, as Gebre Yntiso argues territorial groups separated one from the that Clans basically lacked clearly defined other by geographic settings such as the territories. Their locations were not Gumuz of the Mandura, Dangure, confined to a single territorial grouping. Gublak, Guba, Dibati, Wombera, etc. In It was not uncommon to find the same turn, the different Gumuz groups form a clan or sub-clan that occupied two or much larger territorial category such as more discontinuous territorial areas. At the Gumuz of Metekkel. At higher level, the same time, one could find members of wider categories such as Gumuz of the same clan or sub-clan that lived in Metekkel, Gumuz of Kamashi, and discontinuous localities within a single Gumuz of Metemma from the entire territorial grouping. In fact, the social Gumuz ethnic groups as a whole (ibid). organization became more evident at a There are some differences among village level where members who traced researchers on the social organization of their descent to a common lineage lived. the Gumuz. Some emphasized territorial The pattern of residence could be division as basis for social organization considered as patrilocal /a woman must and identification while others not. As live in her husband’s home after discussed by Desalegn, the social marriage/ since an agnatic lineage organization of the Gumuz people was a members lived together during both pre segmentary one. Gumuz individual and post-marital period. They performed belonged to a territorial group. rituals and ceremonies. Power and Territorial groups were separated from property also inherited through this line each other either by geographical (Geber Yntiso 2001). Due to this; villages features (Desalegn Ramatho 1986:124- became centers of identification, not a

  International Journal of Academic Research ISSN: 2348-7666; Vol.4, Issue-7, July, 2017 Impact Factor: 6.023; Email: [email protected] clan territory. “Gumuz village is usually In other term this form of marriage though not exclusively, composed of required the bride groom to offer his people of the same clan and/or sub-clan sister or daughter in place of the one he is who claim a common patrilineal descent going to marry. If he has no sister or and married women…”. The village was daughter for exchange, he may borrow a identified with and belonged to those who girl from among his closest relatives and claim the patrilineal descent/A person give back his first daughter to the belongs to the descent group of his or her creditor. A boy must be circumcised to father/ (ibid). get married. When a girl marries between an average ages of fourteen to sixteen, Marriage and kinship she moves to the village of her husband’s There are different forms of marriage clan (ibid). practices among the Gumuz Sister-exchange marriage constituted a communities. These are Sister- long term initiation between the two Exchange, Elopement, Abduction, sides. It was long standing contractual Marriage through bride-wealth payment relationship characterized by making and Inheritance Marriage. In Gumuz adjustments that would sustain the communities, the Marriage conducted relation. Among such adjustments, for among the inhabitants of the various instance, claim for the replacement for adjacent villages. Of course, this does not died wife and inheritance of a wife on the mean that marriage relationship among death of her husband can be mentioned. the inhabitants of discontinuous villages On the death of a wife, the husband can did not exist. Gumuz practiced marriage claim for a replacement so long as he has on the bases of clan exogamy, from nothing to do with the cause of the death. outside one’s own clan. Hard work and The other partner side has to offer the pleasant behavior are qualities expected replacement. Otherwise, the claimant has from a bride. the right to take back his sister/daughter. Sister-exchange Conversely, if a husband dies, his widow would be passed on to a younger Polygamy was/is common in the society. brother’s son or even to the son of the This means the Marriage of one man to deceased by a different woman. When several women. The most common and both parties agree, they fix a date of normative form of marriage among the wedding in the families at the same Gumuz communities is Sister Exchange. times, except for the wedding feast; no This is the most dominate and standard form of price is paid or exchanged. On the form of marriage. It is also believed to be wedding day, the parties that go to the the original form of Marriage practiced respective brides fix a central place where by their ancestors and it is fundamental they can meet on their return. On their way of life. It is one of the highly valued way back, they meet at this central place traditions. A groom gives his sister or and exchange greetings making the two daughter of his close relatives in change. brides kiss each other with a facilitation In the process, the parents selects the of elders and then take them to the would-be bride as well as the bride to be respective families (ibid). given in exchange in consultation with their sons and send elders to girl’s In the case of divorce, either the wife family(Jira Mekuria 2008 :48). given in exchange is returned up on

  International Journal of Academic Research ISSN: 2348-7666; Vol.4, Issue-7, July, 2017 Impact Factor: 6.023; Email: [email protected] demand or replacement is requested and with neighboring highlanders (Agaw). given. Exchange marriage among the Hence, taking exchange marriage as if it Gumuz, James explains, “Is a long- played a defensive role against the standing contractual relationships which economic penetration of the highlanders should last a full generation and is tends to miss the presence of age old fulfilled by the plentiful birth and trade relationship between the two survival of children on either side” groups. (Wendy James 1986:133). Marriage through Bride-wealth payment James analyses the effect of this Marriage through Bride-wealth is exchange marriage in terms of Gumuz’s another form of marriage. But it is rarely relation with the neighboring practiced in the society. It required highlanders. This marriage according to payment of bride-wealth in the form of her operates only among the Gumuz and animals, rifles and money. This was did not involve peoples like Oromo, common among the Gumuz around Amhara, Agaw and Shinasha. It had the Guba. Family of the bridegroom would following effects. Firstly, since it did not pay the required amount usually, “ten extend to the highlanders; it defines and cattle, ten goats, ten bars of salt, two partly contributes to their ethnic guns, a spear, a hoe, and a shield to the distinctiveness. Secondly, it protected the family of the bride.” But this amount of society from possible penetration by the bride wealth sharply reduced to five highland economy which could result hundred Ethiopian Birr or property that from the acceptance of a bride wealth in worth equivalent to the stated amount the marriage arrangements even among (W/Gabriel Tesfaye &Tefera Eshet 1989: the Gumuz themselves. This argument 44). seems to be less substantiated. For instance, Bruce tells us that ‘there Elopement existed trade relationship between the Elopement marriage is another form of Gumuz and the Agaw during his time’ marriage practiced in Gumuz community. (ibid). Bartering was active in this trade Here, a boy and a girl love and agree to relation. He also tells us there existed each other. However, the boy may not marriage relationship between the two have a sister or a daughter of close groups intended to facilitate this trade. relative readily available to be given in The way this trade, though very much exchange. In such a case, boy persuades limited, is established, and is by two the girl and elopes with her. Then, he nations sending their children mutually totally disappears and hides himself to to each other. There is then peace avoid the dangerous consequences that between these two families which have result from the furious girl’s family and such hostage; these children often close relatives (Wolde-selassie Abbute intermarry. There was also instance 2002: 68). where Gumuz individuals who failed to provide sister of daughter paid bride Respected and neutral elders will be sent wealth in kind such as, rifle, cattle, goats as soon as possible for intervention. and the like to get married(Jira Mekuria Through the facilitation of elders, 2008:50). These were items that the according to the custom, the issue will be Gumuz obtained through trade relation settled either by immediately giving a girl

  International Journal of Academic Research ISSN: 2348-7666; Vol.4, Issue-7, July, 2017 Impact Factor: 6.023; Email: [email protected] from the boy’s group or with an the parents of a bride to the proposed understanding of the boy’s family being exchange marriage were among the indebted to give a girl’s sometime later. reasons. These reasons usually resulted In a few cases, the couple will give their in Abduction. first-born daughter in ex-exchange for Inheritance Marriage her mother. Unless handled carefully, such acts are highly valued, enabling Marriage through Inheritance was also their clan boys to get wives in exchange. common in the society. Death of a The boy and close kin group members husband usually, gave way to the pay fines in form of livestock for taking inheritance if a widow by relatives of the the girl with the consent of her clan, deceased. The closeness of oneself to the which violates and hurts their dignity deceased determined the potential (ibid). inheritor and in these cases the younger brother was preferred. He also inherited Love affairs between young couples, the property as well as the responsibility absence of a female relative to be to look after the widow and children, if exchanged and refusal of the parents of a any. Property inheritance was extended bride to the proposed exchange marriage to him when the children of the deceased were among the reasons. These reasons (boy/s) could not do that because of age usually resulted in Elopement (ibid). factor. Absence of a husband from his Abduction village for a relatively long period for such reasons as imprisonment and for According to local traditions various military service also resulted in factors that could force an individual to temporary inheritance of his wife by a decide for Abduction. Abduction is a form close kin person. This shows the of marriage in which the girl is taken by existence of temporary transfer of rights force. According to local traditions of sexual access to a wife in the society. various factors that could force an The husband could reclaim his wife on individual to decide for Abduction. his return. Such practices were Among them Love affairs between young performed with the intention of couples, lack of other alternatives, young protecting Adultery by others. man with no sister to exchange or in some cases, property as a dowry may be On the other hand, a husband usually forced to kidnap a girl. This is the most claimed the return of his sister, dangerous form of marriage, and it is repayment of bride wealth or frequently a cause of inter-clan feuds that replacement of a new woman, on the costs lives from both parties and lasts death of his wife. What actually caused long period due to a severe conflicts, the the death greatly affected the response method of handling its effect by neutral either positively or negatively. Factors elders is similar to elopement a part from like sterility also caused similar claims. the higher intensity exerted in handling Genuine claims were settled by repaying the matter (ibid).However, recently this of bride-wealth, replacement of a new type of marriage is rarely happen among woman or by returning the claimant’s the Gumuz society. Love affairs between sister. On the contrary, claims were young couples, absence of a female rejected when they tend to be not relative to be exchanged and refusal of genuine. For instance, when the husband

  International Journal of Academic Research ISSN: 2348-7666; Vol.4, Issue-7, July, 2017 Impact Factor: 6.023; Email: [email protected] or members of his lineage were associated (a witch-doctor). In the celebration in the death. This resulted in ceremony members of village gathered disagreement between the two parties under a big tree, juncture of a road, on and became a source of conflicts. Hence, hilly areas or near water courses. getting a substitute for one’s deceased Scarifying of animals like sheep, or cow to wife was not an easy and automatic (Jira Musa perfumed. The Scarified animal Mekuria 2008:51-53). was divided half being burned in honor and devotion to Musa and the remaining Failure to respond to such claims half would be enjoyed by the participants. sometimes resulted in the divorce of the A religious leader, Etmoawa stood in other side. Apart from this, laziness of a front of the gathered people and dictated woman on agricultural works, sexual the prayer by giving thanks to Musa. weakness of the husband could also cause Prayers for good harvest and in divorce. …’’. Divorce in Gumuz by aspiration for exhortations for peace, definition implies the reversing of the good partnership and health, pleas for process of exchange marriage. This enough rain and to keep Satan (devil) means taking the exchanged brides back away from the community were to their respective families’. However, performed there. Special prayer for this seemingly obvious reciprocating protection and guidance were offered in relationship was not always the rule and stressful conditions like the outbreak of there were other and different ways of epidemic disease, clan fight, famine or dealing with divorce. In fact, the divorces movement from one area to another for of one couple disrupt the life of the other settlement. Individuals also prayed to half of the exchange; but the other Musa in aspiration of good hunting, couple’s marriage could maintain and happiness and family welfare (Jira sustain with new arrangements and Mekuria 2008: 53-54). substitutes (Ibid). Gumuz also recognized the power of Traditional Beliefs System Gafia (witch-doctor). Such individuals are According to available data in study area, owned to possess spiritual knowledge and the mythical creator in Gumuz religion is power. They are said to have the power to “Mussa”. “Mussa” sees, hears and knows mysterious things such as the causes of all. He is believed to be the creature of all death or sickness, the fate of the the living things, the earth, moon, stars community and reasons for weather and sun. change. On top of this, they are believed to have to reverse adversities through The Musa is inevitable but sees, hears prayer, magical and ritual performance, and knows everything. Musa is invisible, herbal medicine, animal scarifies and by the Gumuz sometimes associate Musa to ordering the society to change residence. sun. The society celebrates uk’a-musa i.e. Because of diverse role, it was said that Day of god once a year by preparing beer “Gafia” in (Gumuz) society means (Keya-Musa). Uk’a-musa could be everything. He was a medicine man in celebrated at any of the seasons. But the absence of health centers, clinics. He usually, it is the availability of crops for was also considered as “messenger of god the feast that decided the season. The day and advisor of society” (Ibid). is fixed by religious leader, Etmoawa, and clan elders after the consultation of Gafia

  International Journal of Academic Research ISSN: 2348-7666; Vol.4, Issue-7, July, 2017 Impact Factor: 6.023; Email: [email protected]

Even though, the majority of the Gumuz Wolde-selassie also supports this adhered to their own indigenous religion, communal land ownership. He states that those who came into contact with in the customary communal tenure, neighboring people or the followers of rights to natural resources including land other religion because of the proximity of derived from the community. He also their settlement areas adopted other further states that “The community as a religion such as Islam and Christian group rather than individuals decides the religion. This was prevailed in Gumuz overall use and management of natural inhabited areas in a post-1960s. But this resources. Since the community (ideally does not mean that adherents of either the clan in its defined territory) is the Islam or Christianity were strictly true owner of natural resources, governed by the rules and regulations of individual members are accorded only the religions. One can notice elements of usufruct rights” (Wolde-selassie 2002). indigenous religions practices among On the other hand, Gebre Yntiso, Christian or Muslim Gumuz. The discusses the land holding system as a conversion of most of the Gumuz of Guba ‘controlled Access’ system, combining into Muslim or the others in nearby individual possession with communal District centers into Christianity revealed ownership. Communal ownership is of the influence of the neighboring states two types; society ownership and lineage and people (ibid). group ownership (Gebre Yntiso 2001). All Economic Activities and its dynamics members of the society have rights over among the Gumuz people cultivable virgin lands, forested areas, grazing and/or browsing land, and river Shifting cultivation and land tenure banks. These resources were owned by system the society as a whole. The second one, Agriculture (shifting cultivation) was the lineage group or the sub-clan tenure was main means of subsistence and this made important level to pass decision as well as land an indispensable resource of the to exercise rights and duties. He asserts Gumuz. The land tenure system of the that “all lands under cultivation and all Gumuz has been a subject of controversy plots temporarily left fallow are among scholars. According to the controlled by the lineage that cleared the accounts of Desalegn, land was land for the first time” (ibid). Individuals collectively owned by the clan and have possessory right over the land that members have the right to use the land they cleared. They could pass on their either for cultivation or for settlement. descendants so long as they lived within Agricultural land was a land under the domain of the lineage group. The cultivation or a land which temporarily possessory right of individuals ceased left fallow. In addition, the clan usually when they left the residence of the owned forest or woodland that provided lineage group (ibid). In the same way, supplementary resources to the Sisay states that “all land belongs to the collectivity. As a result, the property of a domestic group as a whole …The Gumuz clan was at least three or four times individual must live inside the domestic greater than what its members actually group to be recognized”(Sisay Muche cultivating at any given moment 1988). (Desalegn Ramatho 1988).

  International Journal of Academic Research ISSN: 2348-7666; Vol.4, Issue-7, July, 2017 Impact Factor: 6.023; Email: [email protected]

Emerging changes in this communal land owned collectively by the residents. As tenure system of the Gumuz have been stated earlier each Gumuz village was seen since 1960s. The subsequent years formed by members that belong to the say ceaseless intrusion of the self-sponsor same lineage. So the land was owned by settlers into Gumuz land. Apart from all members collectively. Individuals paving the way for greater interaction possessed the land so long as they between the Gumuz and the others, the performed agricultural activities on it. development resulted in a relative They could not claim the land they shortage of farm land. The establishment abandoned once to revive (fallow land). of modern administrative structure Again they also could clear forest land naturally challenged the indigenous under the domain of the lineage and use knowledge on the use of land. it until they would leave it. They could Consequently, Gumuz individuals began clear forest land under the domain of the to exercise control over their plots of land lineage and use it until they would leave at the expense of the power of it. Though the lineage group had its own elders/village councils/ who previously domain, this did not mean that there are had a say on matter encroachment clearly marked delineations that because of the proximity of their separated the domain of one from the settlements near to the district centers other. Such type of land holding system bordering the highlander’s began to lose was practiced among the Gumuz of Guba, their traditional power on land. In such the remote parts of Mandura, Dangur, areas, the first occupants began to Bulen and others (ibid). exercise full control over cultivated or This indicates the ongoing change in the fallow fields. They were not willing to land tenure system among the Gumuz pass their plots to their fellow men. after 1960s, a transition from communal Rather, they preferred to rent to the control of land to private control. It was outsiders without the knowledge of evident particularly among those Gumuz traditional leaders (ibid). bordering the highlanders (settlers). The This was why Irwin asserts that “land is economy of the Gumuz population was owned individually, but it is not bought based almost exclusively on agriculture. or sold, nor are boundaries carefully And the most important economic delineated. A man claims land simply by activity was shifting cultivation. Hunting, clearing and using it” (Irwin Lee, 1968). Gathering and fishing were secondary Berihun also shares this idea and claims pursuits. Shifting cultivation also called that land is owned by individuals. Clans slash-and-burn agriculture, involved or sub clans as a unit have no visible successive activities that include impact on matters of lands ownership cutting/cleaning, burning, weeding and and distribution (Berihun Mebratie harvesting. The activity also involved 1996). fallowing the plot for a number of years to regenerate through re-growth and On the other hand, those areas located in vegetation. The community performed remote parts of the region did not see this these activities through labor exchange emerging change. Such areas were less (ibid). encroached and less influenced by state expansion. Thus, the traditional system However, according to local traditions, continued to function and the land was there was no restriction on the amount of

  International Journal of Academic Research ISSN: 2348-7666; Vol.4, Issue-7, July, 2017 Impact Factor: 6.023; Email: [email protected] land that Gumuz individual possessed to family owned. The absence of widespread perform agriculture. He can farm as cattle raring habit of the Gumuz is much land as he can within the domain of attributed to the frequent outbreak of the lineage group to which he is a cattle disease caused by render pest. The member. In fact, the archaic agricultural Gumuz are also Known for their honey tools and the size of labor that he could production (Patrick Wallmark 1981:88- receive during the working season limited 89). the amount of farmland to not more than In addition, members of the society two hectares. As to the first case, performed traditional gold panning agricultural tools were simple and practices along the river courses. The rudimentary that did not permit farming gold recovered was sold to local traders at relatively large scale. These tools and hence, brought them income. include: Gaud or Godda (chopper), Handicraft products were produced for Dugodda (sickle), Ligduma (axe), Gumba sale and exchanged in the local market. (digging stick with iron tip) and others. Among these, pottery items of different In the second case, the size of labor that sizes, Basketry, Keya Filter (Dingha), an individual could receive largely carrying short looped sickle (Gawud) for depended on the quality and quantity of cutting and clearing bush and small the refreshment that he could provide to vegetation) and others can be mentioned those who come to work. This is directly (Ibid). related to the resource wealth and hence, individuals with limited or no resources In contrast to the widespread practices in attracted less communal labor and the many parts of Ethiopia, the vice versa. Social sanctions and moral handicraftsmen were not marginalized at approval and disapproval served as a way all and no form of stigma was attached to of regulating labor. These were ways them. Nor did they belong to any through which the society assured that specialized occupational groups. The labor exchange was on the whole of the society neither looked down up on and same intensity and quality. The sluggish discriminated against them nor placed or incompetent laborer became a topic of them in separate quarters. Instead, the communal jokes and also attracted the handicraftsmen enjoyed increased respect least labor. from the Community for their additional skills of the crafts (ibid). The society cultivates a variety of crops such as cereals, oil seeds, legumes, root These economic activities of the Gumuz crops and others. The most commonly and their traditional way of life began to grown cereals include finger millet, show considerable changes since 1960s. sorghum and maize. Finger millet and The developments that took place in the sorghum are stable crops. Sesame and oil subsequent years increased the intensity seeds often produced as cash crops. Yam and rate of the change. Economically, represented the main cultivated root ceaseless encroachment and expansion of crop. Hunting, gathering and fishing settlement resulted in relative scarcity of constituted important forms of farmland and shortened fallow period. supplementary economic activities. The The former long fallow period of 10-15 society did not own large livestock herds: years or more has been reduced to 3-5 a few sheep, goats and cattle are what a years. The average size and plot number

  International Journal of Academic Research ISSN: 2348-7666; Vol.4, Issue-7, July, 2017 Impact Factor: 6.023; Email: [email protected] of the natives was reduced. Thus, they This bought scarcity in the availability of were forced to utilize fallow fields wild foods to gather and disappearance of without proper vegetative substitution game animals to hunt. Harvest for fishing (Wolde Selassie Abbute 2002: 130). also declined due to the interference in the waters of the area and reduction into The episode resulted in the introduction flow of stream and rivers. Consequently, of new institution unknown to the members of the area had to travel so Gumuz; the land leasing institution. It many kilometers away from their was adapted by the Gumuz as a localities for the purpose of hunting, mechanism of copping with the new gathering and fishing, which is difficult problematic condition. It was a and tiresome(Ibid:82-89). contractual agreement by which the Gumuz entered into terms to temporarily However, a change has been also showed rent their land to their neighbors in in the settlement pattern and nutritional return for a fixed amount of grain, or habits of the Gumuz. Shifting of a sometimes cash. Share-cropping was the settlement to a distant site began to cost most commonly used type of land leasing their plots permanently. Since their arrangement. The Gumuz provided the neighbors were in short of farmland, they land while their partners contributed farmed the land without their consent plough animals, human labor and seed. and consequently, claimed as if it was Size of the land its fertility determined their own. As a result, they began to live the amount of grain that Gumuz gained in a particular area for a longer period from the agreement. The grain would be than before. This indicates the used to boost the insufficient production sedentriztion process. The Gumuz have of shifting cultivation (ibid). also leant to use milk and milk products as part of their diet and rarely for In addition, the Gumuz started to adapt marketing. the plough-based agricultural system. The plough- based agricultural The other economic features that saw technology has been disseminating into considerable change were the activities of the Gumuz and they have started hunting, gathering and fishing. farming using the animal traction CONCLUSIONS method, which was not known in their tradition. As result they began to The Gumuz is one of the groups of the domestic oxen and acquire the knowledge people, who are living in various districts of packaging of farming equipment’s. of Metekkel and Kamashi administrative They also started producing new crops Zone of Benishangul-Gumuz Regional such as Te’ef, which is not possible to do state. They have different cultural, with their old farm technology. economic and social practices and settlement patterns that distinct them The other economic features that saw from others. considerable change were the activities of hunting, gathering and fishing. The The Gumuz people are among the earliest expansion of human settlements and inhabitants of the Metekkel and livestock population pressure minimized originally occupied extensive territory the forestland. The former hunting that extended to the shores of Lake Tana grounds were turned into farmlands. and the Abbay basin from where they

  International Journal of Academic Research ISSN: 2348-7666; Vol.4, Issue-7, July, 2017 Impact Factor: 6.023; Email: [email protected] were forced by the neighboring people. At and constructive criticism had been most present most of the Gumuz people are valuable to me. living in the hot lowlands of Metekkel. REFERENCE MATERIALS A Family is the most important basic Desalegn Ramatho. “Some Notes on social institution among the Gumuz. The Settlement and Resettlement in Metekkel husband, wife/wives and children form Awra a (Gojjam Province),” On the part of the extended families. International Conference of Ethiopia A commune/group home/ is a very Studies, Moscow, USSR Academy of important social unit among the Gumuz. Sciences, Institute of Ethiopian Studies, Members of the same neighborhood seem August, 26-29, 1986. to be ideally egalitarian in nature. They GäbräYintiso. “Resettlement and the perform all field cultivation activities Unnoticed losers: Impoverishment together, facilitated by elders. They share Disasters among the Gumuz in Ethiopia,” closely in all aspects of the village life. Human Organization, Spring, They also drink together Keya (local 2003.http://www. find articles.com. brew), prepared on rotating basis. Most of the time, they pool their labor. The Tsega Endalew. “Luba Basa and Harma neighborhood wives gather and fish Hödha: Traditional Mechanisms of together. When the distance of the village Conflict Resolution in Metekkel, increases far from the shifting cultivation Ethiopia”, http: //www.google.com.et. fields, the whole neighborhood moves to a Pankhurst, Richard. The Ethiopian new site. Through time, a neighborhood Borderlands; Essays in Regional History grows and splits into more from Ancient Times to the end of the neighborhoods. 18th century, Lawrenceville, 1997. A Gumuz clan is mostly composed of its WallMark, Patrick. The Basic Occupation different neighborhood members related of the Say Say: Nilotic Tribes in Northern by descent along patrilineal lines. The Wallagga, Mimeo Naqamtee, 1976. clan is a symbol of identity for its members. The clan territory is strongly Wold G/Tesfayhe and TaferaEshete. A defended by the members against Few about Shinasha Culture. (Amharic outsiders. Inter-clan relations are held manuscript) Asossa, August, 1997. with mutual recognition according to Berihun Mebratie. “Spontaneous customs. Violation of such recognition Settlements and Inter-Ethnic Relations results in inter-clan feuds. Members of in Mätäkkäl: North Western Ethiopia,” closer kin groups live in villages inside M.A. Thesis Department of the clan territory. Agriculture (shifting Anthropology, Addis Ababa University, cultivation) was the main means of School of Graduate Studies, June, 1996. subsistence and this made land an indispensable resource of the Gumuz. Jira Mekuriaw.“The History of the Gumuz People of Metekkel (1941-1991)”, ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS M.A. Thesis, Addis Ababa, Addis Ababa I would like to express my heartfelt University, School of Graduate Studies, gratitude to my Brother Shewa Basizew, March, 2008. whose persistent supervision, guidance

  International Journal of Academic Research ISSN: 2348-7666; Vol.4, Issue-7, July, 2017 Impact Factor: 6.023; Email: [email protected]

Unseth, Peter. “Gumuz: A Dialect C.F. Beckingham and G.W.B. Survey Report”, in: Journal of Ethiopian Huntingford, “Some Records of Studies, XVIII, 1985, 91-114. Ethiopia”, 1593-1646. London: The Hakluyt Society, 1954. 2. Published Sources De Almeida, M. “The History of High Abdussamad H. Ahmad. “The Gumuz of Ethiopia or Abyssinia,”in Some Records Western Go am: The Frontier in of Ethiopia, 1593-1646. (Trans. and eds.) History 1900-1935,” In Africa, Rome: C.F, Beckingham and G.W.B Anno 50, No. 5. 1995, 53-67. Huntingford, London, 1954. ______.“Hunting in Go am: The Case of Desalegn Ramatho, “Resettlement and Mätäkkäl,” In Proceedings of the Right the Indigenous population of Metekkel, International Conference of Ethiopia ”Proceeding of the Workshop on Famine Studies, Addis Ababa, Addis Ababa Experience and Resettlement in Ethiopia, University, Vol. 1, 1988. Part II, IDR, A.A.U., 1988. Bender, Leonel (ed.). People and Cultures Ehret, Christopher. “Nilo-Saharans and of the Ethio-Sudan Borderlands, East the Saharo-Sudanese Neolithic,” in: The Lansing: Michigan University, 1981. Archaeology of Africa. Food, Metalsand Bender, Marvin Lionel. “Distribution and Towns, Trustan Shaw et a1 (eds.), Classification of Ethiopian Language, London, 1995, 104-116. Cushitic and Gongä.” In Fleming, H.C. GäbräYintiso. “Resettlement Risks and and Bender, M.L. Language Survey of Inter-ethnic Conflict in Mätäkkäl, Ethiopia (Mimeographed), Addis Ababa, Ethiopia”, Ethiopia Journal of the Social 1969. Science and Humanities, Vol. II, No, Beke, Charles T. “Abyssinia-Being a 1.College of Social Science and Continuation of Routes in that Country”, Humanities, A.A.U. July, 2004, 45-67. in: The Journal of the Royal James, Wendy. “Life Lines: Exchange Geographical Society of London, XIV, marriage among the Gumuz”, in: Donald 1844, 1-76. Donham and Wendy James (eds.): The ______.“Diary of Journey in Abyssinia, Southern Marches of Imperial Ethiopia, 1840-43”, Micro Film 18/A/2. Cambridge, 1986, 119-272. ______. “On the Languages and Dialects Lipsky, George. Ethiopia: it’s People, its of Abyssinia and the Countries to the Society, its Culture, New Haven, 1962. South”, In Proceeding of the Philological Pankhurst, Richard. “The History of Society, vol. II, No 33, 1845. Bareya, Šanqella and Other Ethiopian Bruce, James. “Travels to Discover the Slaves from the Borderlands of the Sources of the Nile in the year 1768- Sudan,”A Paper Presented on the 1773,”II, London, 1972. Conference of Ethiopia FeudalismOrganized by Research and Cerulli, Ernesta. “People of Southwest Publication Department, Institute of Ethiopia and Its Borderland,” Ethiopian Studies and Historical Society Ethnographic Survey of Africa, London, of Ethiopia, Addis Ababa, 1976. International African Institute, 1956.

  International Journal of Academic Research ISSN: 2348-7666; Vol.4, Issue-7, July, 2017 Impact Factor: 6.023; Email: [email protected]

Taddase Tamarat. Church and State in Region,Ethiopia”, 2002, Social Science Ethiopia 1270-1527, London, Oxford Research Report Series No. 25. University Press, 1972. ______.Inter-Ethnic Relations on a ______.“Nilo-Saharan Interactions With Frontier Metekkel (Ethiopia) 1898-1991, neighboring highlanders,” The case of Wiesbaden: Harrasso WitzaVerlag, 2006. Gumuz of Gojjam and Triulzi, Alessandro. “United and Divided Wollega. In the Proceedings of the and Gabbaro among the Macha Oromo in workshop on Famine of Experience and Western Ethiopia,” in Being and Resettlement in Ethiopia, 1988a, 7-12. Becoming Oromo Historical and ______. “Ethiopia in Miniature: the Anthropological Enquires,Eds.P.T.W. Peopling of Gojjam”, In New Trends in Baxter, etal, Uppsala, 1996. Ethiopia Studies Papers of the Twelfth ______.Salt, Gold and Legitimacy, International Conference of the Prelude to the History of a No-man’s Ethiopian Studies. A Herald Marcus, (ed.) land Benišangul, Wallagga, Ethiopia,” Michigan, 1994. (ca. 1800-1898), Napoli, Istituto ______.“Early Trend of Feudal Universitario Orientale, 1981. Superimposition on Gumuz Society in Taye Reta. “Gojjam Governorate Western Go am,”An unpublished paper General.” In: Ethiopian Geographical presented on International Symposium Journal,Vol.I, 1963. on History and Ethnography in Ethiopia Studies, Addis Ababa, Addis Ababa Unseth, Peter. “Gumuz: A Dialect Survey University Press, April, 25-30, 1982. Report”, In: Journal of Ethiopian Studies, XVIII, 1985. ______.“Processes of Ethnic Interaction and Integration in Ethiopia History: The WallMark, Patrick. “The Bega (Gumuz) Case of the Agaw,” in: Journal of African of Wollega: Agriculture and subsistence” History, XXIX.1988, 5-18. In: People and Cultures of the Ethio- Sudan Borderlands, East Lansing, Tessema Ta’a. “Prologue to the Ethio- Michigan, 1981. Sudanese frontier”, in: Kassa and Kassa, Taddase Beyene, etal (eds.), Addis Ababa, WaldaSellasieAbute. “Gumuz and 1990, 273-285. Highland Resettlers: Different Strategies of Livelihood and Ethnic Relations in Tsega Endalew. “Conflict Resolution Metekkel, Northwestern Ethiopia”, Through Cultural Tolerance: Analysis of Gottingen, University of Gottingen, 2002 the Mi u: Institution in Mätäkkäl (PHD Dissertation).

 