|
|
Issues
in African History by
Prof. James Giblin
|
Like the art of all peoples, the art of
Africans expresses values, attitudes, and thought which are the products
of their past experience. For that reason, the study of their art
provides a way of learning about their history. Through the study of
African art we can study the questions which have long preoccupied
historians of Africa. This essay -- written by a historian who studies
the African past -- presents an introduction to these questions. Its
purpose is to encourage students to use their knowledge of African art
to think about issues in African history.
As students of African art begin to
consider the African past, they must also consider how Western
conceptions of "race" and "racial" difference have
influenced our notions of the African past. These ideas, which have
usually contrasted the presumed inferiority of black peoples with the
superiority of whites, arose in Western societies as Europeans sought to
justify their enslavement of Africans and the subsequent colonization of
Africa. Historians now recognize that ideas of racial inferiority have
inspired the belief that in the past African peoples lived in a state of
primitive barbarism. At the same time, they have realized that many of
the European writings which they use to reconstruct the African past --
such as accounts by nineteenth-century missionaries and travelers, for
example -- are themselves tainted by these same notions of African
inferiority.
This realization has led historians to
seek out alternative sources of information less influenced by European
preoccupation with racial difference. These alternative sources include
writings by Africans (which are found in only a few portions of
Sub-Saharan Africa before the twentieth century), the much fuller bodies
of oral tradition which are found throughout Africa, the vocabularies
and structures of African languages themselves, and the physical
artifacts uncovered by archaeologists. African art is also one of these
alternative sources of information. Like the other alternative sources,
it helps us to understand African history not from the standpoint of
Europeans, but from the perspective of Africans themselves.
As historians have better understood
the fallacy of Western ideas about racial inferiority, they have begun
to seek other ways of thinking about differences between African and
European history. Today, many historians combine ideas of difference and
similarity in their interpretation of African history. They may regard
African cultures as devising unusual solutions to problems which
confront all human societies. For example, the eminent British historian
Basil Davidson argues that Africans dealt with a problem found in all
human communities -- the need to avoid tyranny -- by restricting the
authority of rulers and by promoting the autonomy of small communities.
Other historians explain difference not on racial grounds, but by
considering other factors which affect social change.
Back
to top
One example of this approach is found
in the work of another British historian of Africa, John Iliffe. For
Iliffe, the factor which most strongly shapes the character of African
cultures is the African environment. Iliffe believes that Africans
inhabit an environment whose aridity, infertile soils and profusion of
diseases create particularly difficult challenges for humans. He sees
the history of Africa as a process by which Africans surmount these
challenges through agricultural innovation and sheer hard work. Of
course, other historians disagree with the views of Davidson and Iliffe,
and instead seek other factors which help to explain differences between
Africans and other human societies. Thus part of the task of students
who study African art is to ask themselves whether they see in it
expressions of values and ideas which are unique, or whether they see
manifestations of a common human spirit.
Human history in Africa is immensely
long. In fact, both archaeological re and genetic studies strongly
support the theory that the evolution of the modern human species (Homo
sapiens sapiens) occurred in Africa. The earliest members of the hominid
family of species to which we belong, the Australopithecines, separated
from the ancestors of modern chimpanzees between four and six million
years ago. The earliest archaeological evidence of Australopithecines
comes from northern Ethiopia, and is about 4.4 million years old. The
more dramatic evidence of these early human ancestors, however, are the
famous Australopithecine footprints, made perhaps by parent and child
about 3.5 million years ago at Laetoli, Tanzania.
Traces of a more advanced hominid species, the stone tool-making Homo
habilis, date to about two million years ago. Shortly thereafter,
another human species, Homo erectus (so named for its ability to walk
upright) emerged and developed more refined skills, including possibly
the use of fire.
Early members of Homo sapiens lived in
Africa perhaps 400,000 to 300,000 years ago, although anatomically
modern humans whose skeletons cannot be distinguished from ours did not
appear until about 140,000 years ago. Thereafter, these Homo sapiens
sapiens spread rapidly throughout Africa and the rest of the world,
reaching Europe perhaps 40,000 years ago and America no later than
15,000 years ago. Not only were these modern humans more successful than
earlier hominid species in colonizing vast areas, but they made rapid
progress in developing language, stone-tool technology, and artistic
expression. As they spread across the globe, argues a famous authority
on human evolution, Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza, modern humans adapted to
very different environments by developing the slight genetic variations
which produce differences in skin color, hair, body type and facial
features. Cereal-eating inhabitants of colder northern climates
developed fair skins, argues Cavalli-Sforza, because this trait allowed
them to compensate for a dietary deficiency by absorbing vitamin D from
sunlight. Other populations, however, including both fish-eating peoples
of the northern hemisphere as well as Africans, derived no advantage
from lighter skins, and instead developed the darker complexions which
provide greater protection against ultraviolet rays.
Early communities of Homo sapiens, like
older hominid species, lived by hunting, fishing and gathering
undomesticated plants. However, change in the African climate appears to
have prompted a fundamental transformation in African human life.
Beginning about nine or ten thousand years ago, as much of Africa
(including very arid regions of the Sahara desert and eastern Africa)
developed a much wetter climate, Africans found new ways of obtaining
their subsistence. As lakes and rivers became larger and more numerous,
humans settled around them. At first, their purpose was to fish, collect
relatively abundant plant foods along lake shores, and hunt the animals
which congregated around water sources. When these communities
eventually outgrew the food supplies which could be obtained by these
methods, however, they began the very gradual process of learning how to
cultivate crops and domesticate animals.
Back
to top
In time, the advantages of farming and
livestock keeping would become very great, because these skills provided
more abundant and reliable supplies of food, and allowed more rapid
population growth. Nevertheless, the adoption of these methods quite
likely occurred as a response to crisis caused either by environmental
degradation or by population growth. Farming and livestock-keeping would
have been adopted only reluctantly because they required much more work
than earlier methods of obtaining food. Moreover, these new methods of
food production exposed humans to many new diseases, including
infections contracted from domesticated animals.
Because archaeological evidence of
early farming and animal domestication is very difficult to uncover, and
even more difficult to interpret with certainty, scholars continue to
disagree about when food production began, and about the processes which
brought it into being. In particular, they disagree about whether the
skills of farming and livestock-keeping were obtained from other parts
of the world (particularly the Middle East), or whether these skills
were developed independently in Africa. However, most scholars would
agree that farming and livestock-keeping existed in portions of northern
Africa no later than 7000 years ago. They also believe that as the
African climate changed once again after about 3000 BC, abruptly
introducing drier conditions, agricultural peoples moved southward into
wetter areas, taking with them the skills of cultivation and
livestock-tending.
The retreat of agricultural peoples
away from the increasingly inhospitable Sahara led to the emergence of
the fabulous Egyptian civilization which flourished from about 3100 BC
to 332 BC. Without a doubt, the population of ancient Egypt was African.
The clearest sign of its African origin is language, for the speech of
ancient Egyptians belonged to the language group called Afroasiatic, a
family of languages which originated probably in the southeastern
Sahara. It includes not only ancient Egyptian, but also modern African
languages such as Berber
and Hausa,
as well as Arabic and Hebrew. Egypt was populated probably by farming
peoples who, having migrated from areas to the west of the Nile,
developed highly productive agriculture in lands moistened and
fertilized by its annual floods. Egypt's agricultural productivity was
the basis of its cultural and material achievements. Its intensive
agriculture freed a sizable portion of its population from food
production so that they could invest their labor in monumental
architecture (such as the pyramids), and specialize in political,
military and religious affairs.
Whether the achievements of ancient
Egypt had a major influence on the rest of Africa remains a
controversial issue. One of Africa's most famous twentieth-century
scholars, Cheikh Anta Diop of Senegal,
has long maintained that, just as Greece was the birthplace of Western
civilization, so too ancient Egypt was the cradle of African
civilization. He and others see close resemblance between the languages,
religious beliefs and art of Egypt and Sub-Saharan Africa. Other
scholars find such comparisons unpersuasive, and instead point to
numerous differences between ancient Egypt and the cultures of
Sub-Saharan Africa. Perhaps the most notable contrast is between the
highly centralized nature of ancient Egypt, and the tendency in many
African societies to favor local autonomy. These scholars would prefer
to see Sub-Saharan African culture not as the legacy of ancient Egypt,
but rather as the indigenous achievement of western, eastern and
southern Africa.
Back
to top
While African agriculturalists
retreating from increasingly drier regions were reestablishing
themselves in Egypt, similar population movements were taking
agriculture into western and eastern Africa. Cattle-keeping speakers of
languages which belonged to the Nilo-Saharan family moved into the Rift
Valley and highlands of East Africa. Meanwhile, speakers of Niger-Congo
languages living in what is today eastern Nigeria
and western Cameroon
developed a new form of farming which, because it relied on yams and
plantains (bananas) which flourish in moist, humid environments, was
well adapted to the forests in which they lived. Some speakers of
Niger-Congo would move west throughout present-day Nigeria.
Another branch of the Niger-Congo family, the "Bantu"
languages (so called because these languages share the same word for
"person": ntu or its variants) would spread throughout
central, eastern and southern Africa.
Today few issues in African history are
as contentious as this so-called "Bantu migration," but not
long ago many historians felt that its story was straightforward. They
thought that the inhabitants of the Niger/Cameroon borderlands had
developed a uniquely diverse range of skills (they liked to speak of
this as a "tool kit") which included the ability to cultivate
forest crops as well as iron-working. Knowledge of iron-working, they
believed, had been acquired from the Middle East, and had been refined
between about 500 and 300 BC by metal workers of the Nok
culture (famous among African art historians for its terra-cotta busts)
in central Nigeria.
Equipped with this "tool kit," believed historians, speakers
of Bantu languages colonized remarkably diverse environments across the
southern half of the continent.
Today, however, historians place much
less confidence in this story. They now realize that the spread of Bantu
languages (which they think may have begun about 3000 BC) was a long and
immensely complicated development. It probably occurred not only through
the movement of Bantu-speaking migrants, but also through the adoption
of Bantu languages (perhaps as trade lingua franca) by
previously-established populations. Moreover, migration itself was a
more complex process than historians once thought, for whereas they
formerly imagined a rapid movement of conquering colonizers, historians
are now more likely to speak of a very gradual, generation-by-generation
spread of farming communities in of fresh soils.
Scholars also now believe that the
original Bantu-speaking communities did not practice iron-working.
Instead, Bantu communities appear to have acquired this skill only after
they had reached the Great Lakes region of eastern Africa, where
iron-working may have been practiced in Rwanda and northwestern Tanzania
as early as 800 BC. If this date is correct (and not all archaeologists
agree with it), it would mean that East African iron-working surely
developed independently of any Egyptian or Eurasian influence.
Iron-working undoubtedly contributed to the further spread of
Bantu-speaking farmers throughout eastern and southern Africa. Iron
tools facilitated the domestication of millets and sorghums --
Sub-Saharan Africa's most important cereals before the twentieth century
-- because they enabled farmers to cut the grain-bearing heads of these
plants away from their tough stalks. Thus by about 400 AD,
Bantu-speaking cultivators and iron-workers were well established along
the East African coast (where some Bantu words would be recorded about
this time by seafarers from the Mediterranean) and in South
Africa as well.
Back
to top
Perhaps no idea about the African past
is as persistent and misleading as the idea that Africans traditionally
lived in isolated and homogenous "tribes." This idea implies
that connections among different societies, language groups and regions
were unimportant. It also implies that Africans lived in a politically
undeveloped condition, for "tribes" are usually assumed to be
based on kinship and genealogical descent (they might be thought of as
very large extended families). Thus African "tribal" life
might be regarded as being governed not, as in Western societies, by
sophisticated political institutions, but rather by primordial bonds of
kinship and affinity. An additional implication of this
"tribal" conception of African life is that difference and
conflict existed between different "tribes" (hence the idea of
"tribal" warfare), but not within tribes. Consequently, the
"tribal" model of the African past leads us to overlook the
importance of inter-regional connections, to underestimate the political
sophistication of African cultures, and to ignore the importance of
conflict between social classes, genders, and generations in African
life.
In recent decades, historians have
questioned the "tribal" model by investigating inter-regional
connections, political institutions, and the multiplicity of social
identities which existed in the African past. Historical re has
been particularly effective in demonstrating that, far from living in
isolated "tribes," Africans developed institutions which
maintained political, social and economic relationships across wide
regions. Consequently, African identities were shaped by both village
life and the world of road and market, and by highly localized concerns
as well as inter-regional relationships. This historical re poses
a formidable challenge for students of African art history. It not only
challenges them to seek manifestations of these aspects of social life
in African art, but also forces them to ask whether we should be
satisfied with the conventional ethnic or "tribal"
classification of African art.
We might expect the "tribal"
model of isolated ethnic groups to be nowhere more appropriate than in
the great equatorial forest of modern-day Zaire. This vast and
densely-vegetated region would appear to be the African environment most
likely to impose isolation by impeding travel. Yet, forest peoples were
never isolated. Using the great river systems of the Zaire basin as
their highways, they maintained vibrant commercial and cultural
relationships over wide areas. Drawing upon their common Bantu culture,
the peoples of Zaire developed ingenious political institutions. This is
well illustrated by the Kuba
kingdom, which developed a political system capable not only of bringing
about cultural change (its political institutions altered patterns of
marriage and increased agricultural productivity), but also of
supporting a magnificent artistic tradition. Elsewhere, political
authority and commerce were regulated by a remarkable institution called
the "drum of affliction," an association devoted to the
treatment of certain illnesses which maintained contacts across great
distances.
Similar inter-regional networks of
trade and political authority existed in southern Africa. One regional
system, centered on Mapungubwe, a site located south of the Limpopo
River in modern South
Africa, maintained trade contacts between the Indian Ocean coast,
where Mapungubwe obtained glass beads and other Asian products, and
pastoral communities of the eastern Kalahari Desert, where it found the
products of cattle-keepers. As its wealth and power increased after 900
AD, Mapungubwe developed a social elite which, as a sign of its status,
occupied hill tops and built high stone walls to distinguish its space
from that of the common people who lived on lower ground.
Back
to top
These developments would later be
elaborated at Great Zimbabwe, a site in present-day Zimbabwe.
Great Zimbabwe became important at about the time Mapungubwe was
declining in the early 1200s. Like Mapungubwe, it was apparently a
center of both political authority and long distance trade. Its rulers
appear to have controlled the export of gold to Indian Ocean ports in
modern-day Mozambique
and Tanzania.
Drawing on the tradition of social signification from Mapungubwe, its
rulers built imposing structures, apparently to symbolize their
political and religious authority. Yet, we must doubt that this process
of creating centers of authority and networks of trade proceeded without
dispute and disagreement, for we know that at the shrines where
Zimbabweans venerated their ancestral spirits, spirit mediums gave voice
to grievances against political leaders who threatened the autonomy of
local communities.
The inter-regional networks which grew
up around Mapungubwe and Great Zimbabwe were linked, in turn, to other
regional networks. Evidence of one such network comes from a famous
burial site in the Zambezi Valley (southern Zambia) at Ingombe Ilede,
whose treasures show that in the 14th and 15th centuries, communities
traded the mineral wealth of this region, particularly its gold and
copper, for products of the wider Indian Ocean world. This trade would
later contribute to the rise of the famous Luba
states in the savannas just south of Zaire's equatorial forest.
The networks based at Mapungubwe and
Great Zimbabwe also maintained connections with the East African coast.
For here, along a coastline stretching from southern Somalia all the way
to Mozambique,
another remarkable African civilization -- that of the Swahili
-- developed from about the 8th century. Moving from their original
homeland in northern coastal Kenya,
Swahili-speaking seafarers ventured south along the coast, pausing at
islands, inlets and sheltered beaches to establish fishing villages
which would eventually grow into important trading ports. Between 1000
and 1500 AD, as the trading networks of southern Africa began to send
their products to the Indian Ocean coast, the Swahili
towns grew larger and much more wealthy. They served as commercial
entrepots, attracting products (especially gold and ivory) which would
then be sold to Arabian merchants for a variety of prized imports,
including cotton cloth, Persian glass beads, and Chinese porcelain. In
this way, the Swahili
cities became the linchpin between eastern and southern Africa and the
Asian trade networks which extended from the Mediterranean to China.
In important Swahili
towns such as Lamu in Kenya
and Kilwa in southern Tanzania,
a wealthy and cosmopolitan culture took shape. Its crowning achievement
was stately public and residential architecture which utilized coral
stone and mangrove poles. This was a culture which combined local and
international elements -- for while Swahili
people gloried in their urbane sophistication and embraced the Islamic
faith of their Arab trading partners, they also honored eloquence in
their own language, created a copious body of Swahili
oral epics, and zealously guarded the independence of their small
city-states. Their healing practices, political organization and
structures of kinship drew much more heavily from their Bantu heritage
than from their Arabian and Asian contacts.
Back
to top
A not dissimilar urban,
commercially-oriented culture also developed in West Africa, though here
the greatest ports lay not by the sea, but along the southern margins of
the Sahara desert. Rather than sheltering ships and seafarers, these
West African ports received great camel caravans from North Africa. Yet,
Arab and African geographers would have readily recognized the parallels
between Indian Ocean ports and the desert-side cities of West Africa. In
fact, the Arabic term which they applied to the "Swahili"
coast was the very same word with which they referred to the "Sahel"
-- the semi-arid West African region stretching along the southern
margin of the Sahara. Recently, historians' understanding of these
desert-side cities has been revolutionized. For many years, historians
had believed that the famous Sahelian cities such as Timbuktu had
emerged only after North African traders had established commercial
contacts with West Africa from the 8th century AD. In other words,
historians believed that North Africans had taken the initiative to open
up trade with West Africans.
All of this has changed as the result
of recent archaeological re at Djenné
in Mali. Djenné
was situated advantageously, for aside from its location on the Niger --
a great navigable river rich in fish -- it also lay within the Niger's
"inland delta," where annual floods carry moisture and fertile
silt onto farmlands. A town had already developed here by the 3rd
century BC, and over succeeding centuries would become the hub of a
steadily-expanding trade network. Initially, Djenné
served as a market for local products from the inland delta and adjacent
areas, but by about 400 AD it had begun attracting traders from distant
desert and forest regions. Thus Djenné
has changed our understanding of West African history by showing that
long before Islamic North African merchants began regularly traversing
the Sahara, already West Africa had developed trading networks which
facilitated exchanges of products from desert, savanna and forest
environments.
And yet, while West Africa developed
great trading networks whose riches would eventually persuade the
merchants of Islamic North Africa to make dangerous desert crossings,
West Africans also guarded vigilantly their local autonomy. This was
true even though Sahelian West Africa witnessed the rise of successive
empires -- Ghana (located not within the modern nation of Ghana,
but rather in modern Mauritania and Mali), Mali, Songhay, and Kanem-Borno. Each of these empires was actually founded
upon small clusters of villages which, except when royal cavalry forces
periodically demanded tribute, remained essentially autonomous. The West
African forest and coastal regions stretching from Senegal
to Cameroon
also produced numerous small states, including Jolof and Waalo in Senegal
and Benin in present-day Nigeria.
At the same time, however, many societies, including most famously the Igbo
communities of southeastern Nigeria,
stubbornly resisted political centralization.
Politically decentralized societies
were no less capable than states of great cultural achievement. West
Africa's artistic traditions demonstrate this, for while a state such as
Benin might celebrate its 15th and 16th century rulers in magnificent
brass sculptures, and the Yoruba
kingdom of Ife in southwestern Nigeria
might from the 12th to 15th centuries create a great tradition of
naturalistic sculpture in terra-cotta and brass, so too the politically
decentralized Igbo
produced the fabrics and bronze artifacts which would be buried with a
9th-century notable at Igbo-Ukwu.
Back
to top
The aspects of African societies which
we have discussed in the preceding section encouraged artistic
expression and other cultural achievement. Utilizing a diversity of
materials made available through inter-regional trade, artists
celebrated the aesthetic and ethical values of their societies,
including the value which African cultures placed on personal
achievement, industriousness, and responsibility. Tragically, however,
Africa's extensive trading systems and its predominantly small-scale and
decentralized political structures made Africa sadly responsive to
European demand for slaves.
Between about 1450 and 1880, roughly
twelve million Africans, torn from homes and families from Senegal
to Angola,
reached the Americas as slaves. Countless others, perhaps millions, died
either during the course of enslavement in Africa or en route to the
Americas. Most slaves were taken to the plantation and mining regions of
the Caribbean and South America; indeed, the tiny sugar-plantation
island of Barbados imported as many slaves as the United States. The
slave trade reached its peak during the 18th century when American
plantation production expanded and over six million slaves reached the
Americas. However, the rapid expansion of slavery increased the threat
of slave revolt (a threat realized at the end of century when rebellious
Haitian slaves established the first African-ruled republic in the
Americas), and at the same time made Europeans increasingly aware of the
inhumanity of the slave trade. Consequently, led by the British decision
in 1807 to abolish its slave trade, most European nations outlawed slave
trading during the first quarter of the 19th century. Nevertheless, the
slave trade continued on a diminished scale, and about 3.3 million
slaves were exported to the Americas after 1800.
Historians have long debated both the
causes and consequences of the slave trade, and much disagreement
remains. Few scholars would deny that Europeans bear major
responsibility. It was they, after all, who purchased Africans and
employed them in their American colonies. At the same time, however,
historians of Africa have long realized that the slave trade required
cooperation between Europeans and Africans. Europeans were prevented,
both by African military power and by tropical diseases against which
they had no immunological resistance, from invading Africa and
kidnapping its inhabitants. Consequently, European slavers relied on
African merchants, soldiers and rulers to acquire slaves and make them
available for purchase in sea ports. The dominant pattern of enslavement
was well described by Olaudah Equiano, who in his 18th-century
autobiography described his capture as a young boy in southern Nigeria,
and his subsequent sale and resale to a succession of African masters,
before finally being sold to Europeans.
Why Africans participated in the slave
trade remains one of the most vigorously debated questions in African
history. Among the answers which historians have offered are that
Africans living in small-scale political units sought to profit by
raiding neighboring societies for slaves; that the lack of centralized
political authority prevented internecine conflict; that Africans were
driven by famine and other disasters to enslave themselves and others;
and that, because slavery and slave trading had long existed in much of
Africa (though perhaps in forms less brutal than the slavery practiced
in the Americas), Africans were untroubled by selling slaves to
Europeans. Answering this question leads us to consider not only what
was different about Africa, however, but also the qualities of human
nature that Africans share with other humans. For, like most human
communities, African societies were divided into rich and poor, men and
women, powerful and powerless. As in other societies, the powerful often
succumbed to the temptation to exploit the weak.
Back
to top
Only slightly less controversial are
the consequences of the slave trade for Africa. Some historians have
argued that the slave trade caused devastation, depopulation and
political disruption. Others have argued that Africans engaged in this
commerce precisely because its harmful effects were minimal. One
argument is that the slave trade worsened the condition of women because
men were more often exported, leaving women to assume the labor of
missing men, and increasing the practice of polygyny. Recent re
has suggested that while the slave trade did not cause an overall
decline of African population (though certain regions of West Africa
indeed suffered loss of population), the slave trade prevented the
growth of population which would have occurred otherwise. Consequently,
Africa's population in 1850 was only half the size that it would have
attained in the absence of the slave trade.
Thus the slave trade can be blamed for
having left Africa underpopulated, and for having transferred African
labor to the Americas, where it contributed to American, rather than
African, economic growth. The slave trade can also be seen as one stage
in a very long-term process by which Africa came to be integrated into a
European-dominated global economy. For as the slave trade gradually died
out after 1807, Africans, rather than breaking their ties with Europe,
now employed slaves, who could no longer be sold abroad, in the
production of agricultural goods for sale to Europe. One final aspect of
the slave trade involves its impact on African thought and morality.
Some historians have suggested that the slave trade made African
societies more violent, more interested in personal aggrandizement, and
less caring about human life. While this issue is important, the
scarcity of documentary and oral evidence from the slave trade era
leaves historians poorly equipped to address it. Certainly one challenge
for students of African art is to consider whether African reflection on
their involvement in the slave trade is expressed in art.
Africa's integration into a
European-dominated economy has shaped its history since the 1880s.
During the last quarter of the 19th century, Europe became increasing
interested in exerting direct control over the Africa's raw materials
and markets. European heads of state laid down ground rules for the
colonial conquest of Africa at the Congress of Berlin in 1884-5. Over
the next twenty years, all of Africa except Ethiopia and Liberia
was violently conquered, despite many instances of African resistance.
The British and French established the largest African empires, although
the Portuguese, Belgians and Germans claimed major colonial possessions
as well.
Under colonialism, African economies
were completely subordinated to the interests of Europe. Africa served
primarily as a source of minerals and agricultural commodities, and as a
market for European manufacturers. Consequently, colonial rulers made
little effort to build diversified economies in their colonies, and
introduced little manufacturing. The result is that modern Africa
remains almost entirely dependent on external sources of manufactured
goods. Because these colonial economies required cheap rather than
skilled labor, colonial administrators had little motivation to provide
either education or health care for Africans. Indeed, Europeans
preferred to employ migrant laborers, who left their rural homes for
only relatively brief periods to work in mining or plantation regions,
rather than employing permanently urbanized workers. African colonies
were governed by quite small corps of European officials; most
local-level administration was provided by African employees and
appointees of the colonial government. Nevertheless, colonial government
was profoundly undemocratic, for public policy was made entirely by
European officials, and Africans enjoyed no political rights.
Back
to top
For most Africans (and this was
particularly true for women), the colonial period was deeply
frustrating, because they had little opportunity to obtain the new forms
of knowledge and economic opportunity which were being introduced by
colonialism, and instead were confined to menial, poorly-paid
occupations. African frustration was compounded by the inconsistency
between, on the one hand, universalistic Christian ideals (for
Christianity spread widely during the colonial period, as did Islam) and
liberal political ideas which colonialism introduced into Africa, and,
on the other hand, the discrimination and racism which marked
colonialism everywhere. This discrepancy deepened during the Second
World War, when the British and French exhorted their African subjects
to provide military service and labor for a war effort which was
intended, in part, to uphold the principle of national
self-determination. Post-war Africans were well aware that they were
being denied the very rights for which they and their colonial masters
had fought.
This deepening sense of frustration and
injustice set in motion the events which would lead to national
independence for most of Africa by the mid-1960s. As the Cold War came
to dominate world affairs from the late 1940s, Western Europe worried
that its restive African subjects would adopt Communism. This fear was
intensified by a series of armed revolts (most notably the Mau Mau
revolt in Kenya,
but also rebellions against French rule in Algeria, Madagascar,
Cameroon), and by the rise of powerful, though non-violent nationalist
movements. Persuaded that colonialism could be preserved only through
unacceptably costly military and economic investment, more interested in
the post-war reconstruction of their own economies, and increasingly
confident that a Western-educated African elite would have little
sympathy with Communism, the Europeans began to concede independence to
Africans in the late 1950s, beginning with the independence of Ghana
in 1957 under its charismatic president Kwame Nkrumah.
Although much of the continent was free
of colonial rule by the mid-1960s, European domination of southern
Africa seemed unshaken until the mid-1970s, when liberation movements in
Angola
and Mozambique
expelled the Portuguese, paving the way for the Zimbabwe
liberation struggle which triumphed finally in 1980. Nevertheless, the
most brutal and implacable form of white domination in Africa -- South
Africa's apartheid regime -- would survive into the 1990s. The historic
election of Nelson Mandela as President of South
Africa in 1994 marked not only African victory in a long and
terror-filled struggle against apartheid, but also the conclusion of the
struggle against white rule which dominated African history through the
second half of the twentieth century. Thus the dawn of the twenty-first
century would bring a new era when Africans would confront persistent
economic and political stability, rapid population growth, increasing
environmental degradation, and forms of external domination which
continued to be exerted by Western governments and financial
institutions. Their long history of achievement suggests, however, that
they would find ways of overcoming these dilemmas.
Back to top
<Home
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Introduction:
Diffusion and other Problems in the History of African States by
Prof. James Giblin |
A discussion of the
following African States:
Introduction
In the study of the African past,
attributing innovation to outside origins and influences has been very
common. Sometimes developments are said to be the work of people who
came from outside Africa, while other changes are credited to Africans
from other regions. The development of states institutions which
create centralized government, exercise political authority through
bureaucracy and armies, and integrate territories into unified economic
systems - is one of the aspects of African history which has frequently
been explained in this way. Writers have often claimed, for example,
that the idea of the state first developed in Africa among Egyptians
during the era of the pharaohs, and thereafter spread to the rest of
Africa. Because these explanations remain influential, historians have
been particularly interested in what might be called the
"pre-history" of African states, that is, the developments
which led African societies to create centralized political systems.
Historians and archaeologists have
learned a great deal about the developments which preceded the emergence
of states in Africa. They can now say with confidence that in most
cases, Africans developed states in response to local conditions and
opportunities. Rarely does the diffusion of ideas from distant sources
seem to have been important in bringing about the formation of a state.
Today historians do not think that the history of African states is a
story of the spread of influences from Egypt, Europe or Asia into the
rest of Africa. Instead, the story they see involves African people
living in a great variety of locations who use their political skills
and wisdom to create for themselves centralized systems of government.
Besides learning about the local
origins of African states, historians have found that states were most
likely to arise in regions endowed with fertile soils, abundant rains,
lakes or rivers rich in fish, and mineral deposits, and in societies
which enjoyed plentiful opportunities to trade. In fact, the four
societies discussed below possessed famous traditions of art precisely
because they had productive economies and vibrant commercial systems
which allowed artists and craft workers freedom from scarcity, and
provided access to metals, woods, clays and other media. Finally,
historians have also learned that African states created sophisticated
institutions of government, although, as has been true in all human
societies, greed and love of power have often caused political
instability and social crisis. The following sections, therefore,
concentrate on the local conditions which led to the creation of states
and the creation and destruction of political institutions.
Back
to top
The Yoruba and the States of Ife and
Oyo
The Yoruba-speaking people of
southwestern Nigeria
are heirs both to an ancient and cultured civilization, and a tragic
history. Yoruba
culture is known for its artistic triumphs, extraordinary oral
literature, complex pantheon of gods, and urban lifestyle. Yet, it is
also a civilization which sent millions of its men, women and children
to the Americas as slaves. Their numbers and cultural impact were so
great that their religion and culture have remained important in modern
Brazil and Cuba, and are found today in the cities of the eastern United
States. This combination of cultural triumph and human tragedy makes the
Yoruba
experience one of the most fascinating subjects of historical study in
Africa.
The world, say traditions of the Yoruba
people, began at Ife, a city of great historical and religious
significance in the heart of Yoruba
country. The earth was completely covered with water, these traditions
tell us, when the Creator, Olodumare, equipped a party of messengers
with five pieces of iron, a lump of soil, and a chicken. The party found
a site where they could set down the iron, place the soil on it, and
allow the chicken to begin spreading the soil with its feet. From this
beginning, farm land spread across the world.
While the precise date of initial human
settlement in Yoruba
country remains unknown, many historians find in these traditions
important aspects of early Yoruba
history. First, Yoruba
tradition can be forgiven for having seen the beginning of Yoruba
culture as the creation of the world, for Yoruba
culture is indeed old. The language of the Yoruba
separated from that of some of their nearest neighbors at least 5000
years ago; from their linguistically most closely-related neighbors, the
Igala, they separated 2000 years ago. (The relatively close linguistic
relationship between Yoruba
and Igala has led some scholars to suggest that Yoruba
country may have been settled by migrants who came from the region where
the Igala now live, near the confluence of the Niger and Benue rivers.)
Yoruba traditions remind us that
farmland was not merely discovered, but was created by agriculturists,
and that iron-working must have played a crucial role in its creation.
Surely the great achievement of early Yoruba-speaking communities was
carving open spaces for farming out of the forests which dominate most
of Yoruba
country. Probably as long as 2000 years ago, Yoruba
agriculturists were already using iron tools. Early farmers would have
relied upon the varieties of yams and cocoyams indigenous to West
Africa. By about 2000 years ago, farmers would have begun to adopt
plantains (bananas) which, having been brought to East Africa from
Malaysia, were spreading across the continent.
Just as the evidence available to
historians allows them to say relatively little about when and how
farming peoples occupied the forests of southwestern Nigeria,
so too they are not certain about their early political development.
Some historians have suggested that the oldest political communities
were villages, and that villages consolidated together to form states. Yoruba
traditions, however, speak about the diffusion of kingship from Ife not
only throughout Yoruba
country, but also to neighboring regions, including Benin (see below).
They say that it was the sons of Oduduwa, the leader of the group sent
by the Creator to establish land, who dispersed and created kingdoms.
These traditions have led historians to
wonder whether they mean that Ife, the place where Oduduwa settled, was
also the site of the first Yoruba
kingdom. Scholars have long known that besides occupying a central place
in Yoruba
cosmology, Ife has had great symbolic importance in Yoruba
politics. Even though Ife has not in recent centuries held political and
military power, one of the ways in which a Yoruba
leader won legitimacy in the eyes of subjects and fellow kings was by
gaining recognition as a "son" of the king of Ife. Thus the
king of Ife was considered the "father" of all legitimate Yoruba
kings.
Yet, only in recent decades has
archaeological re established the antiquity of Ife beyond doubt.
Artifacts from Ife have shown that it has been occupied at least since
the 6th century, and that from the 9th to 12th centuries it was "a
settlement of substantial size," with houses featuring potsherd
pavement. From this period date some of the terracotta sculptures and
bronze castings which among students of African art are synonymous with
Ife. The most famous Ife terracottas, which are believed to date from
the 12th to the 14th centuries, along with the great bronze castings of
the 14th and 15th centuries, mark the culmination of an artistic
tradition at Ife which was several centuries old.
The study of Ife¹s famous Œbronze¹
castings has reminded historians about the importance of trade in Yoruba
history. Finding that the so-called Œbronzes" are in fact composed
of either brass or copper, scholars have been led to wonder about the
source of the copper used by the artisans of Ife. They have speculated
that copper may have reached Ife through trade routes extending to
northwest Africa or central Europe. More recently, however, historians
have realized that copper may have reached Ife from nearby deposits in
southern Nigeria.
If so, this would mean that copper was one of the many items, along with
cloth, kola nuts, palm oil, fish, and many other goods, which were
traded not only among the Yoruba
themselves, but also between the Yoruba
and their neighbors.
Trade was also a crucial factor in one
of the most important political developments in Yoruba
history: the rise of the kingdom of Oyo. A settlement at Oyo, which is
located in the far north of Yorubaland, already existed about 1100 A.D.
It appears to have developed into a small kingdom in the late 14th or
early 15th century. Some Yoruba
traditions say that Oyo was founded by Oranyan, the son or grandson of
Oduduwa; other traditions say that Oyo was founded by Sango, who became
the Yoruba
god of Thunder and Lightning. Whomever was responsible, its emergence as
the dominant political power in Yorubaland occurred in the 17th century,
and was hastened by Oyo¹s acquisition of horses. Undoubtedly the horses
came to Oyo from savannah and Sahel regions to the north. Oyo traded
various goods, including kola nuts and palm products, in return for
horses and salt.
Using horses to create cavalry forces,
the rulers of Oyo conquered much of Yorubaland in the 17th century, and
expanded their empire to its greatest extent when, between 1730 and
1748, they forced the powerful state of Dahomey to the west of
Yorubaland to become their tributary. Oyo also took control of the
seacoast between Whydah and Badagry, and expanded trade with Europeans.
Its merchants sold slaves to Europeans in return for cloth and other
goods. Sadly, as exports of slaves from Oyo reached about 20,000 per
year between 1680 and 1730, this portion of the West African coast
became known as the "Slave Coast."
The empire of Oyo collapsed during the
first two decades of the 19th century. The increase of slave-holding
likely played an important role. Enslavement had undoubtedly increased
as slave trading expanded to meet European demand, and slave-holding
probably increased further as a result of the British decision in 1807
to outlaw slave trading, for the gradual decline of European demand
reduced the price of slaves, bringing them within the means of local
purchasers. The increasing importance of slavery may have helped cause a
revolt by an important military commander named Afonja in 1823. Afonja
won support by appealing to Oyo¹s enslaved population. A 19th-century
history of the Yoruba
described Alfonja¹s rebellion in this way: "All the Hausa
slaves in the adjacent towns hitherto employed as barbers, rope-makers
and cowherds, now deserted their masters and flocked to Ilorin under the
standard of AfonjaŠ and were protected against their masters.
With the collapse of Oyo, Yorubaland
plunged into protracted warfare, leaving a landscape of ruined towns and
huge numbers of refugees and captives. Perhaps 500,000 people migrated
from the savannahs of the north, formerly the most densely populated
portion of Yorubaland, to the forests and coastal areas of the south,
where they founded new towns such as Ibadan and Abeokuta. This
catastrophe may have prompted interest in new faiths. Christianity
became important during the 19th century, and Abeokuta became the center
of Yoruba
Christianity. Its spread was largely the work of formerly enslaved Yoruba
who returned home from Brazil and Sierra
Leone. Internal conflict, however, prevented resistance against
European colonial conquest. The British established a protectorate over
the port of Lagos in 1861, and forced Ibadan to accept a resident
administrator in 1893. Colonialism began a process which eventually
would integrate Yorubaland into the Nigerian nation.
Back
to top
Benin Kingdom
The Benin Empire was located in
southern Nigeria,
east of Yorubaland and west of the Niger River. It was populated by
speakers of a group of closely related languages called Edo. Benin is
one of the states of southern Nigeria
which claim to have obtained kingship from the Yoruba
city of Ife. Archaeological re at Benin has shown, however, that
important developments preceded the foundation of the empire. In the
countryside around Benin City lies an extraordinary complex of walls,
thirty feet high in places and stretching perhaps 10,000 miles in
length. Because they are older than the walls of the city which became
the capital of the Benin Empire, historians believe that the region was
the home of a large population before the emergence of a centralized
state.
Historians of Benin believe that its
first kingdom developed in the 12th or 13th century. They think,
however, that the densely forested region around Benin City was still
divided into perhaps several dozen tiny and quarrelsome chiefdoms when,
about 1300, it found unity. According to Benin tradition, when the
chiefs decided to unify they invited Oranyan (or Oranmiyan) from Ife to
become their leader. Oranyan stayed in Benin only long enough to father
a child with a daughter of a local chief. Their son, Eweka, is
considered the first king, or oba, of Benin. Some historians have
suggested that the tale of a marriage between Oranyan and a chiefly
family of Benin may conceal the unpleasant truth that Benin was at this
time conquered by outsiders who became its rulers.
During the 15th century, the famous Oba
Ewuare increased his power by making important reforms. He tried to
reduce the influence of the uzama, a body of hereditary chiefs who
participated in the selection of the oba, by instituting primogeniture,
the rule that a father should be succeeded by his son. He also tried to
find a political counterweight to the uzama by creating new categories
of chiefs, the "palace chiefs" and "town chiefs"
whom he appointed himself. Ewuare is also credited in Benin tradition
with having built a monumental system of walls and moats around Benin
City. In addition, Ewuare vastly increased the territory under the
control of Benin. He and his son, Ozolua, extended the sway of Benin
from the Niger River in the east to the eastern portions of Yoruba
country in the west.
Ewuare¹s reforms created a government
based on checks and balances. It allowed the oba to play off different
factions of chiefs against each other as "palace" and
"town" chiefs competed with the uzama to gain influence. Yet,
while they were appointed by the oba, the "palace" and
"town" chiefs kept independent sources of power. Because they
collected tribute (paid twice annually in palm oil, yams and other
foodstuffs) provided by all the villages and districts to the court, the
oba relied on the chiefs for his revenue. Moreover, Benin¹s political
institutions created endless opportunities for individuals to compete
for advancement through grades of seniority and authority. Even free
male commoners enjoyed opportunities for advancement by competing for
the chiefly titles awarded by the oba. Slaves, however, were denied
these opportunities.
When Portuguese mariners became the
first Europeans to visit this part of West Africa in 1486, the obas were
able to benefit from trade with them. Ozolua¹s son, Esigie, who ruled
from about 1504 to 1550, established close contacts with the Portuguese
and, according to some accounts, learned to speak and read Portuguese.
The obas established a royal monopoly over trade in pepper and ivory
with Europeans. Benin also became an important exporter of cloth.
However, Benin prevented the depletion of its own population by
prohibiting the export of males slaves during the 16th and 17th
centuries, although it did import slaves purchased by Europeans
elsewhere in West Africa, and resold some of them to the region which is
now Ghana
(see section on below).
Wealthy and powerful obas became the
patrons of artists and craftspeople. Ewuare divided Benin City into two
wards, one for the palace and the other for guilds of artists and
craftworkers. Under Esigie the artists of Benin produced their most
famous work. Because trade brought copper and brass into the kingdom,
metalworkers were now able to refine techniques of bronze and brass
casting which had been known in Benin since the 13th century. They
produced a remarkable series of bronze bas-reliefs lining the walls of
the oba¹s palace. The bas-reliefs, writes the historian Elizabeth
Isichei, "recreate the world of the courtŠ The oba, his regalia,
his attendants, a Portuguese hunter with his crossbow, and the bird he
has shot, a royal drummer, naked palace attendantsŠ As a record of past
events, one is tempted to compare them with the Bayeux tapestry.
Historians have described the century
following the death of Esigie in 1550 as a period when the obas withdrew
from politics, yet it is not altogether certain that they were unable to
influence politics even while remaining behind palace walls. Historians
of Benin know relatively little about the kingdom¹s history during the
18th century, although they recognize that slaves supplanted cloth as
Benin¹s major export after it abolished the prohibition on slave
exports. Yet, they have been able to say little about how the slave
trade of the 18th century affected the kingdom¹s economy and society.
The 19th century is often described by
historians as a period of steady decline culminating in the conquest of
Benin by the British in 1897. Like much of West Africa, Benin¹s economy
was disrupted by the decision of the British in 1807 to abolish the
slave trade. Meanwhile, militarily formidable Islamic states to the
north of Benin posed a new threat; one of them, Nupe, seized control of
Benin¹s northern peripheries. To the west, the Yoruba
state of Ibadan menaced Benin. As the nineteenth century wore on,
European traders also established an increasingly threatening presence.
This context of decline and external
menace has been used by historians to explain an infamous aspect of
Benin¹s history, the practice of human sacrifice. They have suggested
that, faced with dwindling profits from trade and besieged by enemies on
all sides, the obas resorted to ritual sacrifice as a way of overawing
their subjects. "The intensification of human sacrifice in Benin
City from the late 1880s," writes the Nigerian scholar A.I. Asiwaju,
"has been interpreted by some as evidence of the desperation of the
rulers seeking ritual solution to the political problem of an imminent
collapse."
Back
to top
Asante
Much of the modern West African nation
of Ghana
was dominated from the late 17th through the late 19th century by a
state known as Asante. Asante
was the largest and most powerful of a series of states formed in the
forest region of southern Ghana
by people known as the Akan.
Among the factors leading the Akan
to form states, perhaps the most important was that they were rich in
gold. In the 15th and 16th centuries, gold-seeking traders came to Akan
country not only from the great Songhay empire (in the modern Republic
of Mali)
and the Hausa
cities of northern Nigeria,
but also from Europe. After the Portuguese built the first European fort
in tropical Africa at El Mina in 1482, the stretch of the Atlantic coast
now in Ghana
became known in Europe as the Gold Coast.
Akan entrepreneurs used gold to
purchase slaves from both African and European traders. Indeed, while
Europeans would eventually ship at least twelve million slaves to the
Americas, they initially became involved in slave trading by selling
African slaves to African purchasers. The Portuguese supplied perhaps
12,000 slaves to Akan
country between 1500 and 1535, and continued selling slaves from Sao
Tome and Nigeria
to the Gold Coast throughout the 16th century. Before Benin imposed a
ban on slave exports (see above), a Portuguese slave trader reported
that at Benin they purchased, "a great number of slaves who were
bartered very profitably at [El] Mina.
The labor of these slaves enabled the Akan
to expand gold production by developing deep-level mining in addition to
panning alluvial soils. Even more importantly, slave labor enabled the Akan
to undertake the immensely laborious task of clearing the dense forests
of southern Ghana
for farming. The most prominent historian of Asante,
Ivor Wilks, suggests that while some farming on a very limited scale had
probably been practiced in the Ghanaian forests for millennia, only when
the Akan
began importing slaves in the 15th and 16th centuries were they able to
shift from an economy which relied primarily on hunting and gathering to
one which became primarily agricultural.
As this transition to agriculture took
place, Akan
communities not only planted more of their traditional crops -
plantains, yams, and rice - but also adopted a wide variety of new crops
from the Americas, including maize (corn) and cassava, which were
brought to Africa by Europeans. Farming led to rapid increase of
population in the forest region. As the population grew, small groups
migrated across the Ghanaian forest, ing for good farm land. Often
these groups were led, believes Wilks, by entrepreneurs who used slave
labor to do the initial work of clearing forest. Later, these
entrepreneurs would invite free settlers to join them, and in this way
new communities were created throughout the forest.
These developments set the stage for
state-building in the 17th and 18th centuries. Politically ambitious
groups sought not only to establish control over gold production and
trading, but also to impose their authority on the new farming
communities in the forest. Consequently, formerly independent villages
combined together in growing states. Whereas in the late 1500s Akan
country contained at least 38 small states, by the mid-1600s it had only
a handful, and by 1700 only one state Asante
reigned supreme. The events which led to the foundation of Asante
began with the rise of Denkyira, a state which waged wars to gain
control of the Akan
gold trade between 1650 and 1670. These wars led many refugees to flee
into uninhabited forest regions. Among the refugees were the clan of
Oyoko, who settled at Kumasi, the town which would later become famous
as the Asante
capital.
Initially the small town of Kumasi had
no choice but to become a vassal of powerful Denkyira, a situation which
required not only that it pay tribute, but also that it send a hostage
to live in the court of the Denkyira ruler as his servant. The chief of
Kumasi chose a nephew, Osei Tutu, to become this hostage. According to Akan
traditions, after becoming a distinguished general in the Denkyira army,
Osei Tutu rebelled against the Denkyira king by refusing to hand over
gold booty which he had captured in war. Then Osei Tutu fled home to
Kumasi. His action must have marked him as a man of exceptional courage
and leadership, for when the Kumasi chief died, probably in the early
1680s, the people of Kumasi selected Osei Tutu as his successor.
Osei Tutu soon expanded his authority,
initially by placing the communities within a radius of about fifty
miles of Kumasi under his control, and eventually by challenging
Denkyira itself. In wars from 1699 to 1701, he defeated the Denkyira
king and forced numerous Denkyira subchiefs to transfer their allegiance
to Kumasi. In the remaining years before his death in 1717, Osei Tutu
consolidated the power of his state. Osei Tutu was succeeded by Opoku
Ware, who increased Asante¹s gold trade, tried to reduce dependence on
European imports by establishing local distilling and weaving
industries, and greatly increased the size of Asante. At his death in
1750, his realm stretched from the immediate hinterland of the Gold
Coast to the savannahs of present-day northern .
By this time it controlled an area of about 100,000 square miles and a
population abbout 100,000 sq miles and a population of two to three
million.
As Asante
grew, it developed an administrative structure modeled on that of its
predecessor Denkyira. Historians sometimes speak about Asante's
"metropolitan" and "provincial" spheres.
"Metropolitan" Asante
consisted primarily of the towns in a fifty-mile radius around Kumasi.
The rulers of these towns, many of whom shared membership in the Oyoko
clan, participated in the enthronement of Asante
kings, served on the king's advisory council, and retained considerable
autonomy. By contrast, outlying Akan
regions were more clearly subordinate and were forced to pay tribute to
the Asante
rulers. The most distant districts of the state which were populated by
non-Akan people annually sent thousands of slaves to Kumasi."
"Opoku Ware and his successors tried to centralize power in the
hands of the king, or asantehene. They placed all trade under state
agencies controlled by the asantehene, and created a complex bureaucracy
to govern and collect taxes. They curbed the power of the military by
creating a palace guard whose commanders were chosen by the asantehene
himself. Asante
achieved a high degree of administrative efficiency (its well-maintained
roads, for example, were famous) and the ability to implement
sophisticated fiscal policies. Nevertheless, the asantehene and his
state always had many opponents. Opoku Ware himself barely survived a
revolt by military leaders in 1748, while towns around Kumasi resisted
interference by the asantehene¹s bureaucracy. Much of the opposition to
the king came from a class of wealthy traders.
The nineteenth century brought new
adversaries: British traders and colonial officials who wished to end Asante
control of coastal towns and trade routes. Between 1801 and 1824,
Asantehene Osei Bonsu resisted the spread of British influence, and led
the defense of Kumasi when the British attacked in 1824. Although Asante
had exported slaves to the Americas throughout its history, when Europe
gradually ended its slave trade in the 19th century Asante
was able to compensate for the decline in slave exports by increasing
sales of kola nuts to savannah regions to the north. Like virtually all
African societies, however, Asante
was unable to prevent European colonization. Its independence ended in
1874, when a British force, retaliating for an Asante
attack on El Mina two years earlier, sacked Kumasi and confiscated much
of its wealth, including its artistic treasures.
Back
to top
Luba and Kuba
Central Africa witnessed the emergence
of important states in both the great forest of the basin of the Zaire
River, and the savannah grasslands to the south of the forest. Here we
discuss two of these states. First we look at the Luba
empire, which arose in the marshy grasslands of the Upemba depression in
what is now the southern Democratic Republic of the Congo.
We then turn to the Kuba
kingdom, which was situated further north, in the forest of the Zaire
basin. Both of these societies produced famous traditions of art.
According to an historian of the Luba,
Thomas Q. Reefe, the marshy environment of the Upemba depression, the
source of the Zaire River, encouraged the formation of a state. It
demanded that its inhabitants develop forms of large-scale cooperation
if they were to maintain a secure and productive lifestyle. In the
Upemba environment of lakes, marshes and river channels, they needed
dikes to protect homes against seasonal flooding, drainage channels, and
dams to retain lake waters for dry-season fishing. Reefe believes that
the need for large-scale cooperation in public works projects led the
people of Upemba to develop political unity.
There is no doubt that the inhabitants
of the Upemba depression found ways of managing their environment
effectively, for archaeological re shows the region has been
occupied continuously since at least the 5th century. By the 6th
century, fishing people lived on lakeshores, worked iron, and traded
palm oil. Soon thereafter, they began trading dried fish to inhabitants
of adjacent forest regions who lacked sources of protein. By the 10th
century, the people of Upemba had diversified their economy, combining
fishing, farming and metal-working. Metal-workers relied on traders to
bring them copper and charcoal which they needed in smelting. Traders
exported salt and iron items, and imported glass beads and cowry shells
from the distant Indian Ocean.
Oral tradition suggests that Luba
state formation was associated both with economic diversification and
the need for effective government described by Reefe. Two of the
characters credited by Luba
traditions with having played crucial roles in the creation of states,
Nkongolo and Kalala Ilunga, are linked with salt and iron respectively.
Traditions say that Nkongolo conquered the original inhabitants of
important salt marshes, and that Kalala Ilunga introduced iron-working
into Luba society. Kalala Ilunga also seems to have introduced better government,
for Nkongolo, the king whom he is said to have overthrown, was a famous
drunkard. Historians are not sure whether Nkongolo and Kalala Ilunga
were real historical actors or simply mythical characters. They are also
unsure when Luba
states came into existence, for they may have begun to emerge anywhere
between the 15th and beginning of the 18th centuries.
Eventually several Luba
kingdoms developed, and trade contributed to their growth. Luba
traders linked the Zaire forest to the north with the mineral-rich
region in the center of modern Zambia
known as the Copperbelt. Copper supplies became so abundant among the Luba
that the dead were often buried holding copper crosses. From forest
regions to the north came a variety of products, including raffia cloth.
The trade routes passing through Luba
territory were also connected with wider networks extending to both the
Atlantic and Indian Ocean coasts. Ultimately, however, long-distance
trade destroyed the Luba
kingdoms. In the 1870s and 1880s, traders from East Africa began
ing for slaves and ivory in the savannahs of central Africa.
Tempted by the lure of quick profits, ruthless warriors began slave
raiding and rapidly destroyed the unity of the Luba
kingdoms.
One of the trading partners of the Luba
was the kingdom of Kuba,
located in the forests to the northwest of Luba
country. The Kuba
state developed east of the confluence of the Sankuru and Kasai rivers,
a region whose mixture of forest, savannah and rivers, and variety of
vegetation and animal life, attracted settlers from the less diverse
forest environment north of the Sankuru. Settlers gradually drifted into
the Kuba
region between 1000 and 1500 A.D., initially forming small communities.
About 1600, a dynamic leader named Shyaam migrated into Kuba
country from the west, and established a new kingdom. Throughout the
remainder of the 17th century, Shyaam¹s successors increased the size
of their realm. They established a government which balanced power among
the royal family, aristocrats and the bureaucrats who collected taxes
and presided over courts.
The leading historian of the Kuba,
Jan Vansina, has shown how the kingdom created a dynamic economy capable
of supporting a remarkable artistic culture. During the 17th century,
farmers adopted numerous new crops, including maize (corn), cassava,
peanuts, sweet potatoes, chili peppers and tobacco, which were brought
to Africa from the Americas by European slave traders. For even though
the Kuba
lived far from the Atlantic ports where Europeans traded, long-distance
trade routes brought these crops to them. Like the leaders of modern
states, Kuba
rulers used taxation to force their citizens to become more productive. Kuba
farmers responded by reorganizing their agricultural calendar to allow
two or three maize harvests per year, modifying the division of labor
between men and women, and allowing men to marry at a younger age.
Because unmarried men did not farm, changing the age of marriage drew
young men into agricultural work.
Vansina believes that these changes
doubled the output of farming communities, and improved the standard of
living of the entire Kuba
population. Production of an agricultural surplus allowed the Kuba
to increase their trade. Not only did they participate in trade networks
which reached the Atlantic coast, but also traded with the peoples of
the forests to the north and the savannahs of the south, including the Luba.
To the Luba
they sent cloth, ivory, mats, camwood and smoked meat and fish, and
received in return slaves, copper, pottery and medicines. Kuba
involvement in commerce continued to increase until they fell under the
colonial rule of Belgium in the early 1900s.
Economic growth fostered the
development of Kuba
art and crafts. As the economy became more productive and diverse, and
as the division of labor within it became more elaborate, so too artists
and craft workers became specialized and refined their skills. In the
manufacture of smoking pipes, for example, some carvers specialized in
the bowls of pipes while others concentrated on the stems. At the same
time, economic growth made the Kuba
elite wealthy and allowed it to patronize fine art. Kings, aristocrats
and bureaucrats become consumers of art and patrons of artists and
craftspeople. Moreover, taxation and tribute payments brought a great
variety of valuable resources from outlying districts to the royal
capital, making metals and prized woods available to the artists and
craftworkers who lived at the capital under royal patronage.
Back to top
<Home |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|