Iris Seri-Hersch

Towards social progress and post‐imperial modernity? Colonial politics of literacy in the Anglo‐Egyptian Sudan, 1946–1956

This article explores the politics of literacy in late colonial Sudan. Drawing upon hitherto untapped archival sources in English and Arabic, it focuses on two key questions: What were the purposes and uses of literacy in the eyes of colonial authorities? What means were used to spread literacy skills among Sudanese people? Positioning these issues in the context of British imperial policy in Africa, it is argued that mixed teams of British and Sudanese educationists came to view literacy as a central tool to foster social progress and political modernity. The analysis puts special emphasis on literacy campaigns and follow‐up literature as experimental means used to promote and perpetuate Arabic literacy in Northern Sudan. Examining both ‘nationwide’ and provincially based magazines, it highlights their multifaceted role as pedagogic materials, vehicles of political, cultural and ideological representations, social networks, as well as public platforms of expression for young Sudanese literates.

Rethinking Sudan Studies: a Post-2011 Manifesto

This essay appraises “Sudan Studies” following the 2011 secession of South Sudan. It asks two questions. First, what has Sudan Studies been as a colonial and postcolonial field of academic inquiry and how should or must it change? Second, should we continue to write about a single arena of Sudan Studies now that Sudan has split apart? The authors advance a “manifesto” for Sudan Studies by urging scholars to map out more intellectual terrain by attending to non-elite actors and women; grass-roots and local history; the environment and the arts; oral sources; and interdisciplinary studies of culture, politics, and society. They propose that scholars can transcend the changing boundaries of the nation-state, and recognize connections forged through past and present migrations and contacts, by studying the Sudan as a zone rather than a fixed country. Finally, in their introduction to this bilingual special issue, they highlight the increasing relevance of French scholarship to the endeavor of rethinking Sudan Studies.

Que sont les “études soudanaises” après l’éclatement du cadre national soudanais? Repenser les rapports entre bouleversements politiques et pratiques académiques

This article offers a critical reflection on the field of Sudan Studies in light of the partition of Sudan into two states in 2011. It charts the emergence of Sudan Studies as a distinct research field, emphasising the temporal gap between the beginning of scholarly writing on Sudan and the moment when the labels “Sudan Studies” and “dirāsāt sūdāniyya” appeared. The current relevance of a “transnational” field of Sudan Studies is questioned, leading the author to suggest various criteria that may legitimise the existence of a distinct -if not unified- “Sudanist” field. Finally, the article envisions the future evolution of the historical scholarship on the two Sudans, both in the new political and ideological context that has been taking shape since 2011, and from a more specifically historiographical perspective.

Education in Colonial Sudan, 1900–1957

In the first half of the 20th century, Sudan, which included the territories of present-day Sudan and South Sudan, was ruled by a dual colonial government known as the Anglo-Egyptian Condominium (1899–1956). Britain was the senior partner in this administration, Egypt being itself politically and militarily subordinated to Britain between 1882 and 1956. During most of the colonial period, Sudan was ruled as two Sudans, as the British sought to separate the predominantly Islamic and Arabic-speaking North from the multireligious and multilingual South. Educational policy was no exception to this: until 1947, the British developed a government school system in the North while leaving educational matters in the hands of Christian missionaries in the South. In the North, the numerically dominant government school network coexisted with Egyptian schools, missionary schools, community schools, and Sudanese private schools. In the South, schools were established by the Anglican Church Missionary Society, the Roman Catholic Verona Fathers, and the American Presbyterian Mission. Whereas Arabic and English were the mediums of instruction in Northern schools, the linguistic situation was more complicated in the South, where local vernaculars, English and Romanized Arabic were used in missionary schools. The last colonial decade (1947–1957) witnessed a triple process of educational expansion, unification, and nationalization. Mounting Anglo-Egyptian rivalries over the control of Sudan and the polarization of Sudanese nationalists into “pro-British” independentists and “pro-Egyptian” unionists led the British authorities in Khartoum to boost government education while giving up the policy of separate rule between North and South. In practice, educational unification of the two Sudanese regions meant the alignment of Southern curricula on Northern programs and the introduction of Arabic into Southern schools, first as a subject matter, then as a medium of instruction. Missionary and other private schools were nationalized one year after Sudan gained independence from Britain and Egypt (1956).

CONFRONTING A CHRISTIAN NEIGHBOR: SUDANESE REPRESENTATIONS OF ETHIOPIA IN THE EARLY MAHDIST PERIOD, 1885–89

This article deals with the Sudanese-Ethiopian conflict (1885-1889) from a Mahdist perspective, in the wider context of the European scramble for Africa. Focusing on Sudanese representations of Ethiopia as well as on the causes underlying the conflict, we confront a Mahdist chronicle of particular historiographical significance with a range of historical sources. Departing from a purely jihadist framework of analysis, we highlight various Mahdist conceptualizations of Christian Ethiopia as well as historical, political, military and economic processes conducive to the outbreak of an armed confrontation between the two independent African states. The paper argues that the Sudanese ruling elite resorted to jihadist discourse as a legitimizing device rather than as an inflexible policy, and examines more specific rhetoric instruments meant to justify Mahdist attitudes towards the Christian kingdom. Whereas prophetical visions were used to make the Khalifas Ethiopian policy acceptable to Mahdist eyes, the ambivalent legacy of early Muslim-Aksumite contacts was reactivated in the framework of a dialogue with the Ethiopian enemy.