Gender, Culture and Class in Walter Rodney’s Writings on Guyana

by Dr. Moses Seenarine

Introduction

Walter Rodney’s scholarly contributions to class and cultural relations in Africa, Europe, and the Americas is well known. Less well know are his shorter, but important, contributions to the study of gender and cultural relations among peoples of Africa and in the Caribbean. This paper explores Rodney’s writings on Guyana, focusing on gender, cultural, and class relations contained in last book, A History of the Guyanese Working People, 1881-1905.

Significantly, this paper shows how Rodney’s economic analysis of African and Caribbean history helps to dispel several gender and cultural myths created by the dominant white colonial state about African and Indian women and men. Chief among these fallacies is the idea that Africans and Indians were complacent in their own enslavement and indentureship, and that African and Indian women were passive, always following the lead of men in their cultures.

Moreover, from a theoretical perspective, his analysis of the structural forces of European capitalism and colonialism in Guyana is not top-down, but rather revolves around an analysis of the agency of individuals and groups whose interests’ are served by these forces, as well as those whose exploitative experiences are contradictory to them. Although socialized into accepting gender, racial and class hierarchy, Rodney believes, and proves, that working people in Guyana were, and are, actively changing the very structures of which maintain and reinforce their underdevelopment, i.e., the colonial and neo-colonial state. The paper goes on to explore an important point that Rodney hints at, but does not focus on in his analysis of Guyanese society, that is, how gender relations and cultural paradigms could be used to explain class differences between distinct ethnic groups.

Gender Contributions

It should be recognized that Walter Rodney was a Marxist historian, not a Marxist feminist, and so, correspondingly, he focus is not on women’s experiences under capitalism. Nevertheless, unlike many other male historians of his time, Rodney acknowledges the roles of the most hidden of historical actors, women, in many aspects of his class analysis of various societies in Africa and the Caribbean. For example, in his most famous work, How Europe Undeveloped Africa, Rodney writes about the important role of Queen Nzinga, the head of the African state of Matamba, which was founded around 1630 with the expressed purpose of coordinating resistance against the Portuguese slavers in Angola (1972:80). Even though she resumed business with the Portuguese in 1656, Queen Nzinga fought against the slave wars in Africa well into her 80s when she died. Rodney’s discussion of Queen Nzinga dispels the widely held notion that Africans were complacent in their own enslavement, and that African women were inactive and unassertive.

Although Guyana have had many native historians, Rodney is one of the first to discuss the position of African women in Guyanese society after the abolition of slavery. In A History of the Guyanese Working People, 1881-1905, Rodney include examples of African women’s contributions to village life, to formation of the African middle class; their roles as domestics and marketers; and their resistance to colonialism and capitalist exploitation. For example, he notes the important role of African women in the production and sale of cassava bread to estates in Essequibo county, and in the production and sale of plantains to markets in Essequibo and Demerara counties (1981:76-77). He also mentions Mrs. Margaret Burns, the leading Creole lady in Berbice in the mid-1880s, who owned a store, a cattle ranch, and other properties (1981:107). So he shows how some African working class women were able to obtain social mobility and move into the middle class.

As a subaltern historian, Rodney’s analysis always centers on the experience, point of view and resistance of the oppressed. Consequently, he does not fail to document the strong female participation in the 1905 rebellion in Georgetown. In this protest, he shows that African female domestics and other women from all levels of the working class, led demonstrations against their exploitation by usurious Portuguese pawnbrokers and other store owners. Rodney explains these women’s agency as emerging directly from the gender relations and economic conditions they face. He writes:

they (women) sought to earn for themselves, but few survived without turning to an employed male relative, a husband, a "child-father" or some such. Little wonder that the women were so vociferous and so active during the riots. They were backing their men, and they were also fighting for themselves and for the reproduction of their families - as they had done before in the 1889 when they attacked the Portuguese retailers (1981:207).

After making a careful analysis of the Court records of the 105 people convicted in the 1905 agitation, and another 45 charged and released, Rodney concludes that at least one in every three of the "rioters" was female (1981:205).

Rodney also comments on the agency of urban African women like the "Tigress of Tiger Bay," and "Daisy, the centipede Queen," who became known for their independence and resistance to colonial exploitation. Besides urban resistance, he reveals that African women were involved in rural labor struggles as well, on the West and East coast, for example, where women like Dorothy Rice led in Ruimveldt rebellion in 1907 (1981:206-208).

Like his small but important contributions to African women’s history, Rodney is among a handful of historians to explore the history of Indian women in Guyanese society. For example, he unveils the agency of Indian women in resisting indentureship as follows:

From time to time, estate disturbances started in the weeding gang, which was essentially the women’s sphere. During the major disturbance at Plantation Friends (Berbice) in 1903, a key role was played by the veteran indentured woman worker Salamea. One driver testified: "I know a bound coolie woman named Salamea. She has been on the estate for three years. I heard that she told her shipmates on Thursday to go fight. She was at Friends before and she went to Calcutta and returned to Friends. Salamea, I hear, urge the coolies who had assembled to fight" (1981:157).

The discussion of Salamea’s leadership of the Friends rebellion unseats the one-sided portrayal of docility and acceptance among Indians relating to the circumstances of their indentureship, and of Indian women’s subservience to Indian men.

In addition to Indian women’s resistance, he points out that gender divisions existed in labor, in that women often earned between 48 cents and 60 cents for a week’s hard work, well below the minimum statutory wages of 24 cents a day that men were paid (1981:41). This clearly indicates that class relations among East Indians was a gendered process. More on this later.

Cultural Contributions

Rodney also focuses on culture and race in Guyanese society, especially at the socio-cultural relations between Africans and Indians. He admits that differences in culture constituted obstacles in the way of working class unity across racial lines. From the 1890s onwards, Indians lived mainly on the estates or in villages, set apart from villages founded by Africans after Emancipation. Rodney writes, "this partial separation undoubtedly contributed to perpetuating differences in religion, language, and customs" (1981:178). He further argues that, given the social boundaries created by colonial administrations and planters, and the divisive actions of ethnic elites, there were actually two working classes in Guyana, African and Indian, both resisting the exploitative conditions of the white capitalists’ plantation system (1981:179).

Unlike many other writers, Rodney does not write exclusively on African-Indian relations in Guyana, but goes to great lengths to distinguish Creoles as a different class and cultural group during the 19th century. Creoles are defined as either persons with part African descent, or as those born in the colony. In his analysis o the Guyanese working class, Rodney disclose the attempts of Creoles to create separate villages in Canals No 1. and No. 2 in the 1870s and 1880s, and their subsequent out-migration in the last two decades of the 19th century due to floods and crop failures (1981:72). He observes that Creole, served alongside the Working Man as the vanguard newspapers of the middle and lower classes in the 1870s (1981:140). Another Creole newspaper was started by Patrick Dargan, a middle-class lawyer in 1905, that vociferously attacked the colonial administration over the 1905 agitation and shootings (1981:204). This aspect of his research has been neglected and needs to be explored more, as the growing numbers of "Duglas" in Guyana constitute one of the most under-represented and unorganized groups.

Regardless of their roles, Rodney is careful to point out that it was not the middle-class who led strikes or demonstrations against colonialism, but the working class. For example, he argues that the 1905 revolt involved large numbers of the lumpen proletariat, who were the by-products of rural-urban migration and unemployment both in the countryside and in the city. Although scapegoated as "centipedes" by the middle-class, Rodney hints instead that the lumpen proletariat were forced into criminal activity in order to survive. He writes,

The deteriorating social situation in Guiana at the turn of this century had led to increased crime in Georgetown, and the phenomenon of urban youth gangs had come to the fore (1981:205).

As part of his major argument, Rodney explores the issue of "creolization," which is the indigenizing experience encompassing all racial groups in Guyana. He suggests that this process occurred in at least four social spheres: (i) among Indian immigrants who were influenced by Creole African practices, such as funeral customs; (ii) within Creole cultures of all races, which became interrelated, for example, rice became the staple for all ethnic groups by the 1890s; (iii) among both African and Indian groups who adopted cultural aspects of the dominant Whites, such as cricket and the institution of the rum shop; and (iv) among the African who participated in the Muslim Indian "Tadjah" ceremonies (1981:179).

In regards to creolization and the development of working class consciousness in Guyana, Rodney concludes:

the existing aspects of cultural convergence were insufficiently developed to contribute decisively to solidarity among the working people of the two major race groups The obverse of this race-class conjuncture is that the development of class forces and class consciousness was inadequate to sustain unity of the working people across the barriers created by legal distinctions, racial exclusiveness, and the separate trajectories of important aspects of culture (1981:179).

In further examining some of the cultural and class conflicts in Guyana, Rodney discusses racial competition for employment as colonial administration and planters use the threat of the super-exploited, cheap labor of immigrant Indians to undercut or replace that of African and Creoles who demanded higher wages. He demonstrates that the colonial government and planter class would use any division among the working class against them. For example he shows how "they deliberately mixed their indentured servants (along gender, caste and class lines) to prevent unity of purpose" (1981:185).

He also explores the process of competition between Indians and Africans for access and control to land and the local economy as growers and sellers of produce (1981:182). Yet, despite the potential for racial violence, Rodney argues that African-Indian conflicts were brief and usually without fatalities, and that they never "came anywhere close to large-scale communal violence" (1981:188). For example, the Leguan dispute during the early 1880s in the Essequibo, and clashes at Plantation Albion in 1881, and at Providence road market in 1890, in Berbice, and between Indians of Plantation Goldstone Hall and villagers of Good Banana Land, were all without serious injuries (1981:184-5). In the end, Rodney concludes that the notion that Guyanese history is ridden with racial conflict has been overstated, and that given the restricted social and economic context, and competition for scarce jobs and resources, it is remarkable that only a few serious physical inter-racial conflicts occurred between the two major ethnic groups.

He further argues that labor and land disputes occurred among groups of Africans, as well as among different villagers, as each racial group and village had its own internal divisions. Regarding differences among Indians, he writes,

Indians did not constitute a homogenous group. They too faced problems deriving from religious, linguistic, cultural, and social differences brought from India (1981:185).

Rodney briefly notes some of the internal caste and class divisions between Indians, and their consequences, so it is useful to quote him at length here:

Most of the indentured "Coolies" were agricultural laborers with no particular specializations. However, there were many with craft skills and there were a few with caste, educational, and other distinctions that could be put to advantage in the society of adoption. A breakdown of the data according to caste indicates a much higher than normal proportion of Brahmins and Kshattriyas (Chatris) among land buyers before 1900, demonstrating that the land buyers were a privileged minority in more ways than one.

High caste status and the job of driver each separately provided advantages which were transformed into class mobility. Clearly, therefore, when the two were combined in one person, that individual was specially favored. Such was the position of Ramsaroop Maraj and Resaul Maraj, who were "sirdars" at Hampton Court and Leonora respectively, during the 1890s, and who subsequently achieved prominence in land ownership and commerce (1981:111).

Significant to the purpose of this paper, Rodney observes that caste and occupational variables were related to class divisions among free Indians. I would further add that "upper caste" individuals often became religious and cultural elites among Indians, and this higher status got further translated into class mobility through patronage and tributes from the lower castes for religious services and so on.

Although he does not say so directly, Rodney must have known that the majority of bonded immigrants, who were landless agricultural laborers, came from the lower castes in India, i.e., Dalits or Untouchables. The descendants of these immigrants form the majority of the present-day Indian population, however, similar to Africans before them, many Dalits to abandon their histories, cultures, and religious practices for more highly regarded ones like Christianity, Islam and Hinduism, due to their inferior status within both high caste Indian culture and the white colonial society. So the need for cultural autonomy and empowerment among Africans is equally strong among the former lower caste Indians in Guyana.

Capital Distribution Among Africans

In Guyana, African women’s position and status was, and still is, very different from that of Indian women. Both groups have had distinct socio-economic histories and were subjected to particular forms of patriarchal control and cultural norms. The destabilization of African patriarchy during slavery, coupled with African women’s work in the production and sale of food crops, before and after emancipation, created a unique space for African women, many of whom were able to achieve some degree of class mobility. In addition, there were little gender distinctions in inheritance practices among Africans and Creoles, which meant that a female could inherit part or all of her mother’s and/or father’s estate.

This practice meant that ancestral property was distributed, more or less, evenly among all brothers and sisters. Over succeeding generations, this inheritance practice led to capital distribution, as each generation had to share their inheritance equally. Let’s say, for example, there is an African woman, Cornelia, who had acquired 100 acres of land by the time she died in 1880. Upon her death, her property would be equally divided between her four children, so each in turn would have a quarter of their mother’s wealth, or 25 acres. Let’s say each sibling was able to acquire about another 25 acres during their lifetime, which leaves them with about 50 acres to distribute to their own, say five children, in the 1920s. Cornelia’s grandchildren would inherit about five acres of land, and have even less to pass on to their children in the 1970s.

Capital Accumulation Among East Indians

A pattern of equal inheritance and capital distribution was certainly not the norm among Indians, Chinese, Portuguese or White ethnic groups, where dis-inheritance of females over succeeding generations contributed to capital accumulation, not distribution. Among the Indians, for example, it is customary that elder sons inherit the estate of their parents, especially among the upper and middle castes/classes, and over time this contributed to class formation and stratification among Indians.

Let’s say, for example, there is an Indian man, Maraj, who had acquired 100 acres of land by the time he dies in 1880. Upon his death, his property would not be divided equally between his, say four children, but his entire estate would be given to his eldest son, who is supposed to look after and distribute the property to his mother, and younger brothers and sisters. In practice, this rarely happens and the eldest son often inherits all of his parents’ wealth, in this case 100 acres. Let’s say this eldest son, Maraj Jr., capitalizes on his large landholdings and is able to acquire another 100 acres during his lifetime, which leaves him with about 200 acres to distribute to his own eldest son in the 1920s. Maraj Jr. would be able to educate all his children, and pass on substantial wealth to his eldest son in the 1970s, upon his death.

As part of this process of capital accumulation, the vast majority of Maraj’s grandsons, with the exception of his eldest son’s children, would mostly likely be poor, and would be lucky to inherit a few acres of their grandfather’s land in the 1920s. They would have even less to pass on to their children in the 1970s. Maraj’s daughters and granddaughters would have inherited very little from their fathers and grandfather, and would be left to the mercy of their brothers and uncles, which leads to other forms of exploitation, issues beyond the scope of this paper.

This gendered inheritance pattern, based on the subordination and exploitation of Indian women’s labor, contributed to class formation and stratification between Indians, and led to class differences between Indians and Africans. This process operated differently during the indentureship period and after abolition. For example, during early indentureship, due to the shortage of Indian women in the colony, East Indian women were able to de-stabilize Indian patriarchy somewhat, as African women were able to do before them, and obtain certain rights and privileges which are not available in North Indian societies. For example, freedom in choosing a male partner, in divorce and re-marriage, and rights in the household. The switch from dowry to bride price furthermore reflects women’s increased status in the colony.

However, Indian women were sexually commodified during this period, which led to severe forms of female exploitation. For example, young girls were often sold by fathers to much older husbands, which led to capital accumulation for some men, based on the domination, subservience, and exploitation of a larger number of females. As indentureship came to an end, and Indians moved off the estates, the sex-ratio equalized and women lost most of the privileges gained during the early period. As a measure of this loss in status, the patriarchal Hindu practice of dowry became re-instated, leading to further commodification of Indian females, and capital accumulation among males who could now demand monetary rewards for marrying a female.

The dis-inheritance of Indian women still occurs in Guyana and the Diaspora, although their situation have improved somewhat as the middle class and professionals are now educating their daughters, who then have the opportunity to become professionals and earn middle class incomes. Here again there are problems, as Indian women are socialized to serve their fathers, brothers and sons, and often their affection is economically exploited in the form of loans and grants of money to their male kin. Nevertheless, women have always resisted patriarchy and have conducted daily and lifelong struggles for equal treatment in the family and Indian community.

Conclusion

In the short span of time after abolition of indentureship, Africans saw the rapid rise of the East Indian middle class and professionals who came to dominate Guyanese society by the early 1950s, and for the most part, do not really understand the reasons behind their social mobility. This gendered form of capital accumulation is one of the reasons why there is such fear and jealously among Africans of Indian prosperity in Guyana.

This process also occurs among other ethnic groups, including Whites. For example, in the early 1700s, George Washington’s father, Augstine Washington willed his entire plantation, enslaved population, and animals, to his eldest son, Lawrence Washington. He willed the land and house he lived on, plus ten enslaved Africans, to his youngest son, George Washington. And to his daughter, Betty, he willed only a small African child, also named Betty after her "owner." The dis-inheritance and exploitation of his sister actually allows George Washington to acquire wealth and rise up into the ranks of the ruling class in colonial Virginia, to become President of the 13 American colonies.

The point being made here is not that African, Indigenous, and other peoples should adopt similar patriarchal practices in order to gain social mobility, but that these communities must work together with women who are directly affected by these negative customs, to eliminate them altogether. Enforcing egalitarian laws which respects women’s right to equal inheritance will lead to less gender discrimination and social stratification among and between various ethnic groups in all societies.

Rodney spent his life researching and educating Africans about their 500 year history of underdevelopment which helped in the development of their European exploiters. Tragically, and ironically, he gaved his life trying to unite Africans and Indians not against European imperialism, but against African neo-colonialsim in Guyana. While his scholarship and revolutionary spirit in class or cultural liberation are explamplarly, his emphisis on the 1905 rebellion shows that he also understood the importance of women’s contributions to the struggle. The spirit of Rodney lives and, one feels that it is urgently calling for a bonding with our sisters, to assist them in the liberation of all women against the structural forces that oppress them, whether in the household, community and/or larger society, from patriarchy and dis-inheritance, to neo-colonialism and transnational capitalism.

Rodney, Walter. 1972. How Europe Undeveloped Africa. London: Bogle-L’Ouverture Publications.

Rodney, Walter. 1981. A History of the Guyanese Working People, 1881-1905. John Hopkins University Press.

[ Back ] [ Home ] [ Up ] [ Next ]