232 ‘The savage within imperiously, his political officer basked in reflect system, observing of the governed was effected through delegation of authority to trusted representatives of the population.'** And the public school rhetoric of hhouse government and team spirit figured in documents of eo istration everywhere.'®* But it begs the question to debate institution of the public school or evolutionary the tion for the structure of coloni for both the institution and the theory derived from the same cu ix. Since the school itself notions of the process of individual maturation and i the model for the assumptions informed both. fed widespread beliefs, and justified tule, If colonial subjects were not smen were termed ~ the distriet com= missioner had a variety of coercive weapons at his disposal. Chiels were unacceptable tory chiefS could be jobs.!5? Thus, by persuasion and coerci indigenous social systems were pressed to fit the mold of bureaucratic tibal order. And the order that suited the colonial admini posedly served evolutionary ends, uniting p ty conflict during We ‘was then sanctioned by assumed that Africans could be made into responsible citizens only if sense of loyalty to their indigenous polit his muir an sere ies of is family's Sips Na Re tld pees er of a family, a tribe, a clan, and cares ‘only on behalf of the community to which he belongs." In Tanganyita as cere in he Dsitsh Exp, pl social order to wibal citize authority, and exhorted their c office in order to mobilize p Like their fellows elsewhere, Tangat the customs of the peoples in their charge reflec ion. Approvingly, they noted evidence gers pastoralists; acquiring definite notions of private proper ‘clan organization to tribal poli“more conservative” sector of the population.” But the colonial canoa of where by their democratic sympathies — whi sound administrative pr required that historical precedent be found bby the perc al officers wished to effect, and the difficulties if provided with genuinely respow: often had in establishing historical rationales for tiom to other colonial theorist, Panganyikan oliials to adopt policies tht deviated from the “Tanganyika were high on the evolutionary scale because they colonial norm. cratic rather than feudal, and condemned administrative procedures inst= Unlike interwar administrators elsewhere, Tanganyikan officials fre= tuted elsewhere because they benefited the chiefs at the expense of the quently recognized the flldky of ethode Senay anc the ienpassbiy of people. Abandoning the administrative convention that stateless peoples Inpuling coeventional mciels Cal orprab tor aS utthe people could be brought to a higher stage of evolution under centralized tebal they edicndttered. Hor ecarple; onthe tai of soon isonet government, Cameron endorsed the creation of conciiar systems of they concluded that a group might have a very strong ethnic dentiy that swas of recent origin; before the era of German rule, one such population Ported that the ypical ‘Tanganyil fof democracy as any human society of ‘Thus, an administrative solution that was li hhad not been cohesive, but they had been defined as on of outsiders, and had come to accept others’ trib colonial officials undertook to create ethnic loyal acknowledge that they were fabri Furthermore, Tanganyikan officials recognized that they could find no Tanganyikan for arguing that some peoples had ever been oreiin= of years before , even prior ‘mentation of German fas ready for government based on universal sul ‘As one officer wrote, “A glance ral history of this part of ‘Tanganyika Territory seems to suggest wwe are accustomed are not necessary aspects of mative such peoples talked of oni officials, they portrayed their const as essentially democratic, atributing colonial officials’ difficulties in under- standing their way of ie tothe undemocratic nature of European culture; they perceived (accurately) the technocratic ethos of colonial administra~ dl no personal experience of tion, and assumed that the colonial officials