Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T00:36:49.413Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

MIDWIFERY TRAINING AND FEMALE CIRCUMCISION IN THE INTER-WAR ANGLO-EGYPTIAN SUDAN

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 1998

Abstract

Although the conventional image of the colonial medical encounter in Africa depicts a white, male, European doctor treating a black African patient, most of the actual deliverers of Western medicine in Africa during the colonial period were non-Europeans. In the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan, British doctors formed only a small minority of Western medical practitioners. Most often, it was Syrian, Egyptian and Sudanese doctors, and Sudanese assistant medical officers, mosquito men, nurses, sanitary officers and midwives who delivered sanitary and medical services on behalf of the colonial state. Understanding the cultural exchanges, technology transfer and power relations involved in the operation of colonial medicine clearly requires careful study of the training, the role and the experiences of these non-European practitioners of Western medicine.

In this paper, one such group of medical practitioners is examined through a study of the Midwifery Training School or MTS, opened in Omdurman, Sudan in 1921. The MTS sought to create a class of modern, trained Sudanese midwives, out of, and in rivalry to, an entrenched class of traditional midwives, known as dayas. The analysis relies heavily on the papers of Mabel E. Wolff, founding matron of the MTS and her sister, Gertrude L. Wolff, who first arrived in Sudan to train nurses. Throughout the discussion, the name ‘Wolff’ alone designates Mabel, whose voice dominates their collective papers.

Type
Colonial Midwives
Copyright
© 1998 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

I would like to thank Robert Bickers, Steve Feierman, Katherine Rake, Megan Vaughan and an anonymous referee for their constructive criticism. I am also grateful to those who commented on earlier versions of this paper presented at various seminars in Oxford, at the ‘Nursing, Women's History and the Politics of Welfare’ conference, Nottingham, 18–21 September 1996, and at the 36th Annual Meeting of the African Studies Association, San Francisco, 23–26 November 1996.