Toyin FalolaThe major aim of this book is to present the relevance of culture to Africans in the modern era. The definition and meaning of culture are broad: values, beliefs, texts about the beliefs and ideas, multiple daily practices, aesthetic forms, systems of communications (e.g., languages), institutions of society, a variety of experiences that capture Africans’ way of life, a metaphor to express political ideas, and the basis of an ideology to bring about both political and economic changes. Even nature does not escape inclusion in the definition of culture, disregarded, as some analysts do, as being in opposition to culture. To many Africans, nature is understood in part as a religious agency—to talk about nature is to talk about culture. The complexity of past traditions is inscribed into the notion of contemporary modernity. The cathects of meaning and relevance associated with culture are multidimensional and eclectic, such that to many Africans, culture is really the single word that explains and justifies most things, from the organization of private domains to complicated political institutions. It is treated as a package of social heritage, with all the knowledge and skills vital to survival and reproduction. This book reflects this eclecticism. It reflects changes as well: culture evolves, adapting itself to new circumstances and environments. New ideas come from the outside, to replace older ideas or to be blended with existing ones. Culture and society can be fluid, reflecting an ongoing adaptation. Society and its culture can regress or progress.
African sections of The History and Geography of Human Genes (Cavalli-Sforza, Menozzi, and Piazza 1994). Because the archaeological record for Sub-Saharan Africa is inadequate to assess the historical reconstructions made in that book, he rightly concentrates his discussion on the assumptions that underlie those reconstructions. I fully agree with the thrust of this paper. Additional clarication of the rather exible biological concept of deme might be useful, but overall we are provided an excellent discussion of the many problems in equating demes with ethnic and/or linguistic groups. Indeed, the typological approach to ethnic groups that was at one time almost universal in African anthropology and archaeology carries with it an assumption of stability and endogamy that is necessary for simple interpretations of genetic patterning but may well not be an accurate reection of the real situation, either historically or biologically. MacEachern also points to many of the technic
id: 77206f38fcc0804413276f30a4d38f41 - page: 16
Integrating fundamentally dissimilar bodies of data and overcoming the tendency of people working outside their eld to misunderstand the nature of other data are among the most important problems facing complex multidisciplinary research. As this paper demonstrates, The History and Geography of Human Genes falls prey to both of these pitfalls. Genes and their geographical distribution are measurable quantities. Ethnic groups (tribes) and languages are much more complex, uid, and situationally determined. Any quantitative method that attempts to compare all three must take great care to avoid dimensional heterogeneity, the fallacy of using incomparable scales in statistical analysis. As anyone working with stone tools knows, the subdivision of observational data sets into types that can be compared with statistically identied patterning of dissimilar data is difcult enough, particularly since we now know that stone tools often had complex life-histories. The situation is immeasurabl
id: 8e3918c0ded3c37c9f6badf567bc8dc2 - page: 16
If the types themselves, in this case African tribes, are incorrectly characterized as static and essentially timeless entities, then the conclusions drawn from these comparisons are certain to be debatable.
id: 8f30347feaf8342dd0a374d309968803 - page: 16
The dynamic situational nature of ethnic identication is familiar to every anthropologist in Africa. For example, in an area of the Zambia-Congo border where I did archaeological surveys, my workmen routinely identied themselves as Kaonde or Lamba to each other, but to strangers they might say they were children of Mwachiamvuwa (Lunda) in order to derive prestige from their precolonial tributary relationship to the Lunda state. In these circumstances, a local doctor and one from elsewhere collecting blood samples might well get different ethnic attributions. In addition, colonial maps show discrete tribal areas when in fact the earliest ethnographies of the area (Doke 1931, Melland 1923) suggest a much more complex mix of ethnic identities. This mosaic may well have been present in the distant past 372 F c u r r e n t a n t h ro p o l o g y Volume 41, Number 3, June 2000
id: 7094b4d38464f6ef60c94f03f286a9a8 - page: 16