The colonial period marked one of the most transformative eras in the history of the Gambela region and its Indigenous inhabitants, particularly the Anywaa. While the Anywaa had maintained decentralized village autonomy for centuries, the arrival of European explorers, the expansion of the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan, and Ethiopia’s growing interest in its western frontier created new political pressures. These encounters altered communication patterns, territorial control, local leadership, and the social balance between Indigenous peoples and newly empowered migrant communities. The region’s shared river systems, especially the Openo (Baro), and Sobat, became strategic entry points for colonial involvement, reshaping political life on both sides of what later became the Ethiopia–South Sudan border.

Early Foreign Explorers and the Opening of the Region

European knowledge of the region significantly increased in the late 19th century through expeditions like those of Major H. H. Austin, whose 1899–1900 and 1900–1901 journeys documented the Openo (Baro), Sobat, and Pibor river basins in precise geographic detail. Austin’s observations highlight both the Anywaa’s Indigenous autonomy and the growing interest of colonial governments in mapping and controlling the Upper Nile corridor. He describes traveling through Anywaa villages along the Openo (Baro) and Pibor regions, seldom visited by outsiders, while conducting surveys that fed directly into British administrative planning in the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan.

These expeditions, though initially framed as geographic surveys, laid the groundwork for increased colonial presence. Explorers like Austin saw the region as an area of political vacuum, where undefined borders between Ethiopia and Sudan invited competition. This turned the Gambela region into a zone of intense imperial interest by the early 20th century.

The Impact of the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan

From the 1890s onward, the administrators of the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan increasingly treated the Sobat and Baro river settlements as frontier areas requiring British oversight. Evans-Pritchard (1947) and Lienhardt (1957) note that the Anywaa in Sudan were lightly administered compared to other Nilotic peoples, primarily because their decentralized villages were difficult to manage under a centralized colonial system. Nonetheless, British authorities attempted to recognize local headmen as “official chiefs,” thereby altering the traditional balance of village leadership and sometimes undermining older mechanisms for removing unpopular leaders (such as the agem rebellion).

The British also introduced new territorial boundaries that split the Anywaa community between two colonial administrations, Sudan and Ethiopia. While most Anywaa villages remained on the Ethiopian side, the border now cut through a previously unified cultural and political landscape, limiting movement and altering traditional migration paths.

Ethiopian Imperial Interests and the Establishment of Gambela Station

Simultaneously, the Ethiopian Empire sought to extend formal control over its western frontier. The Baro River became a key strategic asset, seen as a potential commercial route connecting the highlands to the Nile and international markets. By the early 1900s, Emperor Menelik II and subsequent Ethiopian administrations negotiated treaties allowing European traders to operate at Gambela Port, an outpost established to serve as Ethiopia’s principal river port.

Colonial documents and administrative notes, such as those in Sudan Notes and Records—show that the presence of Greek, Sudanese, and British traders in the region expanded dramatically. Portable trade goods, imported firearms, and new economic incentives heightened competition among neighboring groups. The Anywaa, who historically relied on beads and iron for local exchange, now encountered new trade networks centered on ivory, livestock, and imported commodities.

This expansion strengthened the position of outsiders, including traders, highland officials, and migrant laborers, diminishing the relative political autonomy of the Indigenous population.

Colonial-Era Conflicts and New Power Dynamics

Colonial presence intensified conflict in several ways:

1. Nuer Expansion and Colonial Borders

Bacon (1922) documents how the Jikany and Gaajak Nuer migrated eastward into Anuak territory long before the onset of heavy colonial administration. However, colonial borders froze these demographic shifts into new political realities. The Nuer, whose expansion was driven mainly by cattle and resource competition, benefited from the introduction of firearms and political alliances that sometimes placed them in a stronger position than neighboring Anywaa communities.

2. Alteration of Village Leadership

Lienhardt (1957) and Evans-Pritchard (1947) describe how British attempts to appoint “chiefs” for administrative efficiency conflicted with Anywaa norms of leadership based on lineage legitimacy and community consensus. The kwaro had traditionally been accountable to his village and removable through collective action, but colonial hierarchy weakened these internal mechanisms.

3. Increased Militarization and Surveillance

European expeditions described frequent armed escorts, fortified camps, and punitive patrols. Major Austin’s accounts, for example, describe how armed Sudanese troops accompanied him through Anuak areas, an early sign of the militarization that would become characteristic of colonial oversight.

These changes eroded Indigenous autonomy and embedded the region into a wider structure of colonial governance.

Economic Shifts and the Integration Into a Colonial Market System

The establishment of Gambela Port transformed the region’s economy. Goods flowed between Ethiopia and Sudan, and ivory, agricultural products, and livestock became part of a broader commercial network. Traders introduced new forms of debt, taxation, credit systems, and political leverage. Anywaa communities, historically self-sufficient agrarian societies, were drawn into new market dependencies.

Wall (1976) emphasizes that these economic shifts heightened inequality, as certain villages gained access to trade while others were left behind. This imbalance increased inter-village competition and weakened the traditional independence of the political system.

Conclusion

Colonial encounters in the Gambela region brought profound political transformations, altering the balance of authority, shaping territorial boundaries, and restructuring local economies. While the Anywaa had long maintained decentralized and autonomous leadership structures, the arrival of British, Ethiopian, and European commercial interests introduced new pressures that reshaped traditional governance. The mapping of the region, the construction of Gambela Port, the appointment of colonial-recognized chiefs, and the influx of migrant communities shifted power away from Indigenous institutions. These changes set the stage for many of the political and demographic challenges that define the region today. Understanding the colonial era is therefore essential to understanding Gambela’s modern history and the continuing struggles of its Indigenous peoples.

References

Austin, H. H. (1902). Among Swamps and Giants in Equatorial Africa. London: C. Arthur Pearson.

Bacon, C. R. K. (1922). The Anuak. Sudan Notes and Records, 5(3), 113–129.

Evans-Pritchard, E. E. (1947). Further observations on the political system of the Anuak. Sudan Notes and Records.

Lienhardt, G. (1957). Anuak village headmen. Africa: Journal of the International African Institute, 27(4), 341–355.

Wall, L. L. (1976). Anuak politics, ecology, and the origins of Shilluk kingship. Ethnology, 15(2), 151–162.

Sudan Notes and Records (1922). Province Notes.