How did direct rule in Nigeria compare to indirect rule?

Direct rule in Nigeria was more intrusive and controlling compared to the more autonomous system of indirect rule.

Direct rule, as implemented by the French in their colonies, was a system of colonial administration in which the governing power has direct control over the colony. In contrast, indirect rule, as practised by the British in Nigeria, involved the use of local traditional rulers and structures to administer the colony.

In the direct rule system, the colonial power maintained a strong presence and control, often replacing traditional authorities with their own officials. This was the case in Nigeria during the brief periods of direct British rule. The colonial government sought to control all aspects of the colony's administration, from the economy to the judiciary and education. This often led to a significant cultural and social impact, as the colonial power imposed its own values, language, and customs on the colony.

On the other hand, indirect rule was a more hands-off approach. The British, under the leadership of Frederick Lugard, used existing traditional structures to govern. Local rulers were allowed to maintain their positions, provided they pledged loyalty to the British Crown and implemented its policies. This system was less disruptive to local cultures and societies, as it allowed a degree of autonomy and maintained traditional customs and institutions. However, it also reinforced pre-existing power structures, which could be exploitative or oppressive.

In terms of effectiveness, both systems had their strengths and weaknesses. Direct rule allowed for more efficient implementation of colonial policies but often led to resistance and resentment among the local population. Indirect rule, while less disruptive, could lead to misinterpretation or misuse of colonial policies by local rulers.

IB History Tutor Summary: In Nigeria, direct rule meant the colonial government controlled everything, often changing local ways and causing conflict. Indirect rule allowed local leaders to stay in charge under British guidance, keeping local cultures more intact but sometimes reinforcing unfair systems. The British mainly used indirect rule in Nigeria, but sometimes applied direct rule where there were no local leaders or lots of resistance.