Thursday, October 14, 2010

Myth & Materiality in Kongo Historiography


“The traditional cannon of historical scholarship is clear and universally accepted in the profession: every relevant source must be taken into account, but no source is to be accepted uncritically.”[1]
-Philip D. Curtin

            To be an effective Caribbeanist, I have been told that what I really need is to be an Africanist. Searching for historical texts on the Kingdom of the Kongo has been extremely helpful in determining precisely what types of narratives I am interested in exploring for research on origins of Black Atlantic cultural systems. In particular, I realize how interests in material culture seem to guide my research initiatives, though in investigating 17th, 18th and 19th century histories, there appear to be fewer textual works that deal explicitly with “fetish objects” rather than the people who fashioned and used them.
            Adam Jones’ “Thoughts on the Use of Early European Records” contends that in studying pre-twentieth century texts,  “99% of the available documentation has nothing whatever to do with material culture: it concentrates rather on political and economic information, on descriptions of flora and fauna, on general remarks about the character and physical features of Africans, or on religious beliefs.”[2] While his statistic seems quite bold (has anyone in fact had a chance to explore the sources this extensively?), it poses significant concerns about the search for studies that may provide insight on material histories in oral communities. Jones goes on to state that of the few Africans whose written legacies have survived through colonial periods, few if any wrote on material culture themselves, and that even these works do not prove particularly helpful in their brevity of detail. [3] Certainly in works on the ancient Kongo, it has been exceptionally challenging to find texts written by Kongo peoples themselves, as Christian missionizing forces did not emphasize literacy nearly as much as Islamic invaders did in more northern parts of the continent. With this in mind, it becomes clear that oral African sources may prove more reliable in studying material works.
            In Curtin’s work “Oral Traditions and African History,” he distinguishes between varied forms of orality, notably with three classifications. He differentiates between formal traditions, informal traditions and personal recollections, noting particular differences in approach to interviewing that include more guiding questions or casual discussion-like forums depending on the relationship between interviewer and participants and intended aims of the study. As Curtin further explains, “Fieldwork with oral data, however, required another kind of method. Here the historian changes from his old role as an archive-user: he becomes instead an archive-creator. His notes and tape recordings… often [become] primary sources that exist in that copy alone.”[4] While such emphasis on the responsibility of the researcher to provide translations and detailed classification systems for collected studies, this text proves more helpful in conceptualizing contemporary methods than indicative of how history has been recorded in the past. In fact, the very problem with so many historical transcripts is that translations have been poorly completed if at all, and so many cultural misunderstandings take place—as is the case with Duarte Lopez and Filippo Pigafetta’s Report of the Kingdom of Congo—that it seems it would be almost as pleasant to rely on silent material objects rather than avid and insensitive European explorers.
            In a refreshing exploration of creation myths from Dogon and Yoruba communities, Suzanne Blier considers the role of these oral traditions as historical narrative and political mappings of the region. After hearing an origin myth from the Yoruba about in which Obatala takes a prominent role, she offers that such narratives can provide assistance in chronicling historical markers in empire. In fact, this myth of origin can be historicized by noting the period in which Obatala became a central figure in the pantheon of Ifa, and Blier points out how “[myths] reflect in various ways the means through which knowledge itself is shaped. In some contexts, myths of origin may be viewed as history; in others, such narratives lie more in the realm of science.”[5] As my research delves further into the religious historical trajectory and material past of the Kongo Kingdom, perhaps this such structure of study, combining orality and materiality, will provide an effective method to explore oral histories, myth and material legacies of this central African kingdom.


[1] Philip D. Curtin. “Oral Traditions and African History,” in Journal of the Folklore Institute, Vol. 6, No. 2/3 [Special Issue: African Oral Data Conference], 1969, pp. 138.
[2] Adam Jones. “Drink Deep, Or Taste Not: Thoughts on the Use of Early European Records in the Study of African Material Culture,” in History in Africa, Vol. 21 (1994), pp. 350.
[3] Jones, pp. 350.
[4] Curtin, pp. 140.
[5] Blier, pp. 45.

No comments:

Post a Comment