Ideological framework and social cohesion.
An ideology has been defined as: “a more or less coherent system of beliefs held in common by the members of a group or collectivity and which, through an interpretive evaluation (weber) of the situation in which the group is placed, explains and justified its existence andcontributes to its integration” (d’Hertefelt 1967 p.217).
When speaking about the court, as distinct from delegated power, particularly in the case of the king, we have pointed out how the sacredness of the king and his ritual function expressed his identification with Rwanda as a whole and at the same time provided an explanation and ajustification for his position in the overall political system. This body of beliefs was known to all the members of the society and was regularly and publicly expressed in ritual and ceremonies. Thus it contributed to the integration of Rwanda society because of the common dependence of all members of the king for their individual well-being, fertility and occupational success and for the prosperity of the community at large.
Moreover, as we have seen, the body of beliefs, basic to the ritual and to the kingship, embodied a concept of common rights in the kingdom inasmuch as the king transcended ethnic and occupational cleavages. To this transcendence of the kingship corresponds a subjective role expectation by the people. As in all societies with a centralized government, the king delegated his powers. In Rwanda this was done through the administrative and army structures.
As such they were accordingly extensions of his kingship since it is through them that the powers of the king flowed, not only in demands, e.g. for taxation and army recruits,but also in the administration of justice and the provisionof land and pasture. D’Hertefelt has explained how; “an abundant court literature (dynastic, genealogic, pastoral and martial), was directly or indirectly intended to glorify and exalt the dynasty as well as the existing social and political structure”.(i960 p.128)
Independent as to whether it was indeed “intended”, the fact that the structure was mythically andhistorically sustained, served not only as a rationalisation and explanation of the status quo but gave it the sanction of being a link with and an expression of the kingship of divine origin. This mythical sanction constituted a justification of existence of the kingship and contributed to the integration of all groups in Rwanda society.
In relation to this some points should be made concerning the superiority of the Tutsi. These have been classified according to the following themes:
(a) The celestial origins of the Tutsi
(b) The fundamental and natural differences which exist between Tutsi and others
(c) The superior civilisation of the Tutsi (d’Hertefelt 1964 p.221)
D’Hertefelt further remarks that these inegalitarian myths were on the whole not known by the Hutu and Twa and that some were only known at the court as a great secret. Important as this ideology might have been for the cohesion of the power-holding lineages it does not detract from the ideology as expressed in the king’s ritual and as seen by the ruled.
The existence of opposing ideologies constituted however a weakness in the system. It led to a conflict between the role expectancy expressed in the body of beliefs of the rulers assuming inegalitarianism and the role expectancy corresponding to the body of beliefs held by the ruled. It is in the office of the chief that this latent conflict is focussed. The nature of the power of the king and the nature of the delegated power structure enabled the expression of conflict to be confined to the field of inter-personal relations. Conflict could be solved by the king in removing the chief.https://uk.amateka.net/ideological-framework-and-social-cohesion/https://uk.amateka.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/umwami_abatwa-1.jpeghttps://uk.amateka.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/umwami_abatwa-1-150x150.jpegSocial & culture⦁ An ideology has been defined as: “a more or less coherent system of beliefs held in common by the members of a group or collectivity and which, through an interpretive evaluation (weber) of the situation in which the group is placed, explains and justified...BarataBarata email@example.comAdministratorAMATEKA | HISTORY OF RWANDA