Mauritania :Ethnic groups
The Moors constitute almost three-fourths of the population; about one-third of them self-identify as Bīḍān (translated literally as “white”), which indicates individuals of Arab andAmazigh (Berber) descent. The remainder of the Moorish population has Sudanic African origins and is collectively known as Ḥarāṭīn. Sometimes referred to by the outside world as “Black Moors,” the Ḥarāṭīn speak the same language as the Bīḍān and, in the past, were part of the nomadic economy. They served as domestic help and labourers for the nomadic camps, and although some remain, they were the first to depart for urban settlements with the collapse of the nomadic economy in the 1980s. While there is a general correlation based on skin colour, what determines status is a credible lineage that can document noble origins. Thus, one might encounter a black “white,” as some Ḥarāṭīn might pass for Bīḍān if their name or lineage is unknown.
Roughly one-third of the population is made up of mainly four other ethnic groups: Tukulor, who live in the Sénégal River valley; Fulani, who are dispersed throughout the south; Soninke, who inhabit the extreme south; and Wolof, who live in the vicinity of Rosso in coastal southwestern Mauritania.
The Moors, Tukulor, and Soninke share a broadly similar social structure, in as much as these groups were historically divided into a hierarchy of social classes. At the head of these socioeconomic layers were nobles who had dependents and tributaries, and these “well-born” populations were frequently supported by servants and slaves.
In Moorish society the nobles consisted of two types of lineages: ʿarabs, or warriors, descendants of the Banū Ḥassān and known as the Ḥassānīs, and murābiṭ—called “marabouts” by the French and known in their own language as zawāyā after the name of a place of religious study (see zāwiyah)—who were holy men and scholars of religious texts. The warriors generally claimed Arab descent, and many of the zawāyā traced their origins to Amazigh lineages. The greatest part of the Bīḍān population consisted of vassals who received protection from the warriors or zawāyā to whom they paid tribute. At the bottom of the social hierarchy were two artisan classes—the blacksmiths and the griots (troubadour-praise singers). Servant classes were subdivided into slaves and freedmen, known as Ḥarāṭīn, although their personal autonomy was severely limited in the nomadic economy. Slavery was abolished by the French in colonial times and has been banned a number of times since independence. In 2007 the country’s legislature passed a bill that made slavery a criminal offense. Slavery (and its definition) remains a very sensitive issue for the Mauritaniangovernment, which has long disputed its continued existence in spite of reports to the contrary by international groups. For servants in the rural economy who are dependent upon their masters and who lack the skills necessary to join the urban economy, the line between servitude and freedom is very ambiguous. So long as there is a dependence upon such labour to maintain the Bīḍānī lifestyle, there remain both expectations by the servant classes that their well-being is the responsibility of the well-born and the long-standing cultural assumption among the Bīḍānī that black Africans belong in a servile role. As the old nomadic economy withers away, however, so too this relationship has been gradually disappearing. Since independence there have been sporadic efforts to find common political ground between black populations in the country and the Ḥarāṭīn. Such a coalition would constitute a clear majority of the population, but to date, political pressure on the Ḥarāṭīn and their cultural and linguistic roots in Bīḍānī society have deflected any political configuration based simply on race.
From : http://www.britannica.com/
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق