Archie Mafeje

58 Pages·2008·0.64 MB·English

CODESRIA Bulletin, Nos 3 & 4, 2008 Page 1
Editorial
A Giant Has Moved On
This 12th General Assembly is taking place exactly one year and Sociology Department at the University of Dar Es Salaam, Tan-
nine months after the death of an illustrious member of zania before moving to The Hague as a Visiting Professor of
CODESRIA, one most committed to the problematic of the pub- Social Anthropology of Development and Chairman of the Ru-
lic sphere in Africa. Wednesday 28 March 2007 will go down as ral Development, Urban Development and Labour Studies
a sad day among social researchers all over Africa and beyond. Programme at the Institute of Social Studies from 1972 to 1975.
It was the day Professor Archibald Monwabisi Mafeje (fondly It was here that he met his wife and life-long companion, the
known among friends, colleagues and admirers as Archie) passed Egyptian scholar and activist, Dr Shahida El Baz. In 1979, he
away in Pretoria, in what was a most quiet exit that has left very joined the American University, in Cairo, as Professor of Sociol-
many of us whom he touched directly or indirectly, in a state of ogy. Thereafter, he took up the post of Professor of Sociology
sadness and anger. and Anthropology and Director of the Multidisciplinary Re-
search Centre at the University of Namibia from 1992 to 1994.
Archie Mafeje, the quintessential personality of science and
Mafeje was also a senior fellow and visiting or guest professor
one of the most versatile, extraordinary minds to emerge from
at several other universities and research institutions in Africa,
Africa was, in his days, a living legend in every sense. His
Europe and North America. He is the author of many books,
knowledge and grasp of issues – almost all issues – was breath-
monographs and journal articles. His critique of the concept of
taking. His discourses transcended disciplinary boundaries and
tribalism and his works on anthropology are widely cited as key
were characterised by a spirit of combative engagement under-
reference materials. He also did path-breaking work on the land
pinned by a commitment to social transformation. As an aca-
and agrarian question in Africa.
demic sojourner conscious of the history of Africa over the last
six centuries, he rallied his colleagues to resist the intellectual Mafeje returned to South Africa several years after the end of
servitude on which all forms of foreign domination thrive. He apartheid where he was appointed a Research Fellow by the
was intransigent in his call for the liberation of our collective National Research Foundation (NRF) working at the African
imaginations as the foundation stone for continental liberation. Renaissance Centre at the University of South Africa (UNISA).
In all of this, he also distinguished himself by his insistence on In 2001, Archie Mafeje became a member of the Scientific Com-
scientific rigour and originality. It was his trade mark to be un- mittee of the Council for the Development of Social Science
compromisingly severe with fellow scientists who were medio- Research in Africa (CODESRIA) and in 2003 was awarded the
cre in their analyses. The power of his pen and the passion of Honorary Life Membership of this Council. In 2005, Professor
his interventions always went hand-in-hand with a uniquely Mafeje was appointed a CODESRIA Distinguished Fellow in
polemical style hardly meant for those who were not sure-footed conjuction with the Africa Institute of South Africa, in Pretoria.
in their scholarship. This, then, was the Mafeje who left us on
28 March 2007, to join the other departed heroes and heroines An Incarnation of Africa’s Intellectual Ideals and
of the African social research community. A great pan-African, Struggles
an outstanding scientist, a first rate debater, a frontline partisan Archie Mafeje was in many regards an epitome of the intellec-
in the struggle for social justice, and a gentleman of great hu- tual ideals that engineered the creation of CODESRIA in 1973,
manitarian principles, Archie was laid to rest on Saturday 7 April and that has fuelled and propelled the Council for the past thirty-
2007 in Umtata, South Africa. five years. To Issa Shivji, he was a man of “great intellectual
rigour and integrity” who did not compromise on ideas, and
Professor Archie Mafeje, South African by birth, completed his
“whose ideas were so powerful that you instinctively felt you
undergraduate studies and began his career as a scholar at the
had known the man from time immemorial.” He was a rigorous
University of Cape Town, but like many other South Africans,
and thorough researcher who, already in the early 1960s, im-
he was soon forced by the apartheid regime to go into exile
pressed his professor and supervisor – Monica Wilson – with
where he spent the better part of his life. He obtained a PhD in
the quality and depth of his masterly ethnography in Langa
Anthropology and Rural Sociology from University of Cam-
(John Sharp). But, as his daughter, Dana, rightly remarked in
bridge in 1966. In 1973, at the age of 34, he was appointed Pro-
reaction to the outpouring of tributes following his death, Mafeje
fessor of Anthropology and Sociology of Development at the
was more than just an intellectual giant. He was above all a
Institute of Social Studies in The Hague by an Act of Parliament
human being. “My father was critical but humane, fierce but
and with the approval of all the Dutch universities, becoming
compassionate, sarcastic but gentle, silly but brilliant, stubborn
the first African scholar to be so distinguished in The Nether-
but loyal, but most of all, he was passionate.”
lands. That appointment bestowed on him the honour of being
a Queen Juliana Professor and one of her Lords. His name appears Indeed, it was this passion and compassion, this humanness
in the prestigious blue pages of the Dutch National Directorate. that made him both appreciated and contested, leaving few in-
different in the face of his sharp, incisive, critical mindedness
Archie Mafeje’s professional career spanned four decades and
and love for debate in which he, metaphorically, did not hesitate
covered three continents. From 1969 to 1971 he was Head of the
CODESRIA Bulletin, Nos 3 & 4, 2008 Page 2
to cross swords or draw blood. His debates with fellow African knowledge) because he was black in the apartheid eyes of the
intellectuals in the pages of the CODESRIA Bulletin – which Minister of National Education, despite his being the best can-
we have reproduced in this special tribute issue – were, in the didate for the position. It could always be argued that if Mafeje
words of Ali Mazrui (one of his intellectual adversaries), “brutal had reason to be angry and bitter vis-à-vis the UCT authorities
– almost no holds barred!” Ali Mazrui, whose idea of ‘inter- for having succumbed too easily to government pressure, he
African colonisation’ Archie Mafeje viciously savaged as an should have taken heart to reintegrate himself at the end of
attempt at facilitating Europe’s recolonisation of Africa, regrets apartheid in the 1990s from the fact that the National Union of
not having had “a formal intellectual reconciliation” with Mafeje South African Students protested the violation of his academic
before his passing away (Ali Mazrui). His utter forthrightness, freedom through mass demonstrations within UCT and in other
razor-sharpness, brilliant turn of phrase, cynicism, polemical university campuses, including a sit-in that lasted for nine days
style, unwavering stances, and penchant for pushing arguments (Lungisile Ntsebeza). He was relevant to students in the 1960s
to, and even beyond their logical conclusions, made Mafeje to just as he was in exile, and within the CODESRIA networks
come across sometimes as “deeply embittered”. where he served as resource person and mentor to younger
scholars; and would certainly have been relevant to students in
However, there was reason enough to be embittered and sad-
South Africa as well, after the 1990s, with some mutual forgiving
dened for someone at war against the intellectual hegemony of
and forgetting.
those who proclaim universal truth and wisdom, regardless of
time or space, on a continent where many of his colleagues
UCT and the Game of Reconciliation: Too Little, Too
continue to embellish their references with irrelevant writers
Late
from the global North to prove their intellectualness (cf. Issa
Following the end of apartheid in the early 1990s, instead of
Shivj, Jimi Adesina). There was reason for bitterness and sad-
things getting better in the spirit of truth and reconciliation,
ness for someone outstandingly critical of double-speak and
relations between UCT and Mafeje only worsened, despite sev-
other shortcomings of the African political and intellectual elite
eral attempts by Mafeje to return to UCT, including as the AC
(Kwesi Prah), to realise that such dissemblance was far more
Jordan Chair in African Studies. Mafeje felt insulted and in cer-
deep-rooted and resilient than he initially imagined. And there
tain cases described as “most demeaning” the reactions of the
indeed was reason for embitterment and sadness to be per-
authorities of UCT to his efforts to return to his alma mater as
suaded to return “home” to a post-apartheid South Africa where
professor. When it was announced to him that another candi-
little in effect is post anything, and where, instead of closing
date had been offered the AC Jordan Chair to which he, Mafeje,
ranks to win the battle of ideas, many are the black intellectuals
had not even been invited for an interview, Mafeje wrote: “In
who continue to be induced from academe into government, the
1968 it was an honour to be offered a post at UCT but in 1994 it
corporate world and NGOs, where bureaucracy and making
is a heavy burden which only the politically naïve or the unim-
money matter more than knowledge production, social justice,
aginative can face, without some uneasy doubts. I might be
truth and reconciliation (Eddy Maloka).
wrong, but only time will tell.” From then on Mafeje treated with
Despite his immense generosity of spirit and capacity to see the disdain various overtures by UCT, including the proposed award
other side even when he disagreed with it, Archie felt more in of an honorary doctorate and a formal apology in 2003. Only in
exile back home in South Africa than he ever felt away from August 2008, almost two years after his death, did UCT bring
South Africa. According to Jimi Adesina, the relative intimacy together 11 members of the Mafeje family at a symposium where
he enjoyed within CODESRIA circles was brought home to a second apology was issued and an honorary doctorate
Mafeje through the pain of his intellectual isolation in South awarded him posthumously. The Mafeje family agreed to over-
Africa. “The tragedy for all of us,” Jimi Adesina writes, “is that rule Archie Mafeje and accept the apology on his behalf, an
Archie did not die of natural causes – he died of intellectual apology in which UCT recognises that it “did not do nearly
neglect and isolation. In spite of the enormous love of his family enough in the 1990s to make it possible for Professor Mafeje to
and loyal life-long friends, Archie’s oxygen was vigorous intel- return to UCT, and that this remained an obstacle to his recon-
lectual engagement. He lived on serious, rigorous and relevant ciliation with his alma mater” (Lungisile Ntsebeza).
scholarship. Starved of that, he simply withered.” Yet, as Maloka
Whatever the reasons for his rejection of overtures of reconcili-
argues, instead of succumbing to embitterment and sadness,
ation and recognition by UCT, Mafeje was seldom comfortable
Mafeje should have used “his towering intellectual stature and
with honours, especially in his life time. In December 2003 when
his ‘straight-shooting’ approach” to help “make the case for a
CODESRIA, on the occasion of its 30th anniversary celebra-
very vibrant, strong and independent black intelligentsia as a
tions, decided to honour him with a Life Long Membership of
force to reckon with in confronting the enduring legacy of apart-
CODESRIA in recognition of his lifetime contribution to schol-
heid.” His age was taking a heavy toll on him, Maloka admits,
arship, Mafeje was grateful but full of misgivings. “It might be
but if he had asked Mafeje, the latter would probably have
that you are wishing me not a soon death, but death alright.
repeated what he said at the CODESRIA 30th anniversary
When you honour people, you usually honour them after their
conference in Dakar in December 2003: “You don’t make knowl-
deaths, and the glory comes after their death. But this glory
edge alone”.
comes before death,” he told the special panel CODESRIA had
Archie Mafeje would die before reconciliation with the Univer- put together to celebrate him (Ebrima Sall). The challenge is
sity of Cape Town (UCT) – his alma mater – the intellectual thus for UCT to prove that its posthumous recognition of Archie
community within which he began his knowledge making – Mafeje would bring glory enough to be recognised even by the
which in 1968 rescinded its decision to appoint him senior lec- late Mafeje, a man who was not comfortable with honours, and
turer in Social Anthropology (or right to make and help make who had every reason to be bitter towards an institution that
CODESRIA Bulletin, Nos 3 & 4, 2008 Page 3
had yielded too easily to the pressures of apartheid in his re- poorly conceived and even more poorly articulated attempts at
gard, and that did not appear keen to make him part and parcel affirming Africanity such as “African renaissance” (Eddy
of its post-apartheid identity in knowledge production and aca- Maloka). The extent to which African scholars buy these aspi-
demic freedom (Lungisile Ntsebeza; Teboho Lebakeng). rations in principle and in practice would determine the degree
to which Mafeje and CODESRIA have succeeded in making
A Staunch Critic of Intellectual Colonialism these battles and lofty heights truly collective and pan-African
Archie Mafeje’s bitter critiques of Ali Mazrui’s Africa’s self- beyond rhetoric.
colonisation and Achille Mbembe’s “African Modes of Self-
Achille Mbembe, in a highly erroneous post-modern monologue
writing” are only fully understood in the light of his deep intel-
– ‘African Modes of Self-Writing’, lumps Archie Mafeje together
lectual and political commitment to the total emancipation of
with those he dismisses as “nativists”, in opposition to his own
Africa as a symbol of the pan-African ideals he shared and
supposed “cosmopolitan” experience, outlook and scholarship
fought for in his scholarship, activities and pronouncements.
(Jimi Adesina). Fred Hendricks and others have also challenged
Through his sustained critique of African anthropology as a
Mafeje for freezing his intellectual gaze narrowly on sub-Saha-
handmaiden of colonialism and call for social history to replace
ran Africa, and for inadvertently reproducing ideas about “a
it as a discipline, surfaces Archie Mafeje’s total discomfort with
disaggregated and dismembered Africa” in a pan-Africanism
the epistemology of alterity and exogenously generated and
that had little real room for North Africa beyond the fact of his
contextually irrelevant knowledge produced with ambitions of
considerably long period of stay in Cairo and being married to
dominance, especially when such knowledge is passively inter-
Shahida El Baz, an Egyptian and mother of his daughter Dana.
nalised and reproduced by the very people whose ontology
But such criticism could be countered by the fact that he did not
and experiences have been carefully scripted out (sometimes
necessarily have to study Egypt or North Africa in order to
even as fellow scholars – see the Archie Mafeje versus Sally
consider the region as part of his pan-African project. In the
Falk Moore debate) of this knowledge by misrepresentations
absence of personal scholarship, Mafeje used other indicators
informed by hierarchies of humanity structured, inter alia, on
to affirm his belonging to North-Africa and esteem the region in
race, place, class, gender and age (Jimi Adesina, Helmi Sharawy,
his pan-Africanism. He probably felt more at home in Egypt
Dani Nabudere, Samir Amin, Teboho Lebakeng).
than he ever did in South Africa, especially following his return
As John Sharp argues below, what Archie Mafeje objected to under the post-apartheid dispensation, where he increasingly
about anthropology which he once described as his ‘calling’, felt isolated and lonely, and indeed, where he died unattended
“was not its methods of research or the evidence that could be (Jimi Adesina, Eddy Maloka). Was it a premonition of this lack
produced by careful participant observation. Even at his most of warm relationships in the land of his birth that made Mafeje
critical he took care to endorse the value of this form of inquiry less than enthusiastic about returning home to South Africa
relative to others.” He remained faithful to the fact “that any after 1994, preferring instead to stay on in Namibia as director of
attempt to understand the circumstances of people in Africa the newly established Multidisciplinary Research Centre at the
required firsthand inquiry into what they made of these circum- University of Namibia, even if he did not last long in the latter
stances themselves.” What he objected to therefore, “was an position (Kwesi Prah, Eddy Maloka)?
anthropology in which particular epistemological assumptions
Whatever be the answer to this and similar questions, to meas-
… were allowed to overwhelm whatever it was that people on
ure the fullness of Mafeje’s Africanity and pan-Africanism, it is
the ground had to say about the conditions in which they found
appropriate to go beyond scholarly declarations and appreciate
themselves.” If Mafeje objected to this kind of anthropology, it
the social relationships he forged and entertained in his life in
was “because anthropology was the discipline he knew best –
and away from a place called home, motherland or fatherland.
the one he had said was his ‘calling at the outset of his profes-
According to Kwesi Prah, Archie Mafeje exuded an “effortless
sional career. Had he had cause to express himself with equal
worldliness” that gave him a rare “vibrant and sublime
fervour in respect of other disciplines, he would no doubt have
cosmopolitanism”; and as a veritable cosmopolitan African, he
found the epistemological premises of their liberal versions as
was used to describing himself as “South African by birth, Dutch
objectionable as those of liberal anthropology” (John Sharp).
by citizenship and Egyptian by domicile”. Kwesi Prah writes of
Fred Hendricks notes that Mafeje was committed “to combat- Mafeje’s impressive familiarity with Western literature, Dutch
ing the distorted images produced and reproduced about Africa art, “sophisticated and totally uncommon knowledge of Euro-
from the outside”, and sometimes uncritically internalised and pean wines”, and culinary skills and accomplishments. Just as
reproduced by Africans trained to mimic but not to question “his often placid exterior belied a stridently combative spirit and
(Issa Shivji). Mafeje spent the best part of his life and scholar- expression” in debates, Archie Mafeje’s committed pronounce-
ship contesting the racialised epistemological underpinnings ment and writings on pan-Africanism and the importance of
of a system of social knowledge production into which Africans decolonising the social sciences, often took attention away from
have been co-opted and schooled as passive consumers with- the cosmopolitan that he was – leading to misrepresentations
out voice even on matters pertaining to their very own realities even by fellow African intellectuals. Far from being essentialist,
and existence. In this regard, Mafeje’s unwavering pan- Mafeje was a person to whom belonging was always work in
Africanism has always resonated with CODESRIA’s mission of progress to be constantly enriched with new encounters and
increased visibility for African scholars, African scholarship and new relationships, and never to be confined by geography or
African perspectives on African and global issues. Yet, his call boundaries, political or disciplinary. His deep embitterment came
for the valorisation of Africanity, its creativity and innovations and/or was exacerbated when those claiming him failed to dem-
has not meant easy endorsement for all that claims to be afro- onstrate the nuances and sophistication that made of him the
centric. He has been especially critical of well-meaning but cosmopolitan intellectual and African that he was. As Jimi
CODESRIA Bulletin, Nos 3 & 4, 2008 Page 4
Adesina reminds us, the meaning of Archie Mafeje for three rable knowledge of foods and wines from all corners of the
generations of African scholars and social scientists is about world. For those he has left behind, especially those of us
encounters and the relationships that resulted from those en- whom he inspired, the challenge before us is clear: Keep the
counters. To John Sharp, Archie Mafeje will be remembered as a Mafeje spirit alive by investing ourselves with dedication to the
scholar who spoke truth, unfailingly, to power; and who over quest for the knowledge we need in order to transform our soci-
the years carefully worked out how best to support his political eties – and the human condition for the better. The timely call by
convictions by means of the research he did. In speaking truth Mahmood Mamdani, for CODESRIA to take a formal decision to
to power, he had come to master the art of hard and uncompro- commit resources to gathering Archie Mafeje’s papers, with a
mising intellectual argument, without having to resort to per- view to deciding whether they should be archived at CODESRIA
sonal animosity or the denial of respect for those with whom he or are substantial enough to be archived in a library, most likely
came to argue. in South Africa, with the understanding that these would be
available to all scholars, is precisely what CODESRIA is ac-
Archie Mafeje has fought the battle and run the race success-
tively pursuing. This special issue of the CODESRIA Bulletin,
fully. We will surely miss his thoughtful insights, his strident
and the 12th General Assembly panel in honour of Mafeje are
rebukes, his loyal friendship, his companionship, and – yes, his
part of a package of measures aimed at memorializing his sub-
wit, humour and expert culinary skills that included an incompa-
stantial contribution to the development of knowledge on the
African continent.
Adebayo Olukoshi Francis B. Nyamnjoh
Executive Secretary Head, Publications
CODESRIA Bulletin, Nos 3 & 4, 2008 Page 5
Archie Mafeje
I
came across Archie Mafeje’s name and Mandaza could not help granting
and fame in the late 1960s during my this. His concept of ‘compradorial
student days at the University of Dar Issa Shivji democracy’ might be etymologically
es Salaam, then a college of the Univer- University of Dar es Salaam vulgar and theoretically undeveloped
sity of East Africa. I do not remember hav- Dar es Salaam, Tanzania but, as a shorthand for what is hap-
ing met him personally then. My memory pening or likely to happen in Africa
under the current pax Americana, it
may be failing and, regrettably, Archie is
hits the nail on the head.1
no longer with us to confirm. But Archie’s
piece on the debate. Even while agreeing
ideas were so powerful that you instinc- with my basic thesis, Archie did not spare This wonderful piece, tantalisingly
tively felt you knew the man from time me for my loose formulations. He de- subtitled ‘Breaking Bread with my Fellow-
immemorial. ployed his usual razor-sharpness. I will travellers’, was written sometime in 1992,
The first thing I remember of Archie quote him extensively because it illus- during the transition in Africa from the
Mafeje is a story, then making the rounds trates all I am saying about Archie’s style, one-party to multi-party. It stood out as a
of the student body and young tutorial rigour, theoretical sweep and utter forth- singularly enlightening piece and an
assistants. Archie was the head of the rightness. Using Gramsci’s idea of the incisive review of the debate on
Department of Sociology. He was the su- ‘philosophy of praxis’ as a peg on which democracy among African intellectuals.
pervisor of one of the first PhD students to hang his arguments, Mafeje says: In my view, it remains so to this day.
Almost fifteen years into the so-called
in that department. The student went on
From the point of view of ‘philoso- multi-party democracy, we are now in a
to become the Head of Sociology in the
phy of praxis’, there is always an un- better position to understand and
1970s and was an influential person in the
derlying tension between determinism appreciate Archie Mafeje’s great insights
corridors of power at the university.
and voluntarism. Intended or not, this and analysis of the struggle for
Archie failed him. The thesis, Archie said,
manifested itself in the exchange be-
democracy. I would like to invite my fellow
without mincing words, was not passable.
tween Shivji and Mandaza (1990).
African intellectuals to revisit that debate
He stood by his decision in spite of the
Mandaza was inclined to accuse Shivji
and Archie’s great contribution.
usual pressures. So long as Archie was in
of determinism or ‘waiting for Godot’
the department, the man did not get his in his academic and theoretical tower Archie’s remarks cut sharply, but I never
doctorate. I came to learn later that the (unkind words, perhaps communi- felt the pangs of hurt. Rather, my respect
thesis was passed after Archie left the cated as a sign of respect and appre- and admiration for him increased. Archie
university. The students told and retold ciation), while not only reserving the read his fellow African intellectuals, took
this story with great admiration. For us, latter for himself but advocating it for them seriously, and engaged with them
then, Archie’s stand symbolised his great others on the basis of his experience without being patronising. Unlike many
intellectual rigour and integrity. On ideas, in Zimbabwe, without acknowledging of our colleagues, who embellish their
he would not compromise. that it is a mixed one. He also chas- references with writers from the global
tised Shivji for ‘caricaturism’. Perhaps North, to prove their intellectualness,
Personally, I adore and respect Archie for
Shivji deserves what he got. He
Archie’s references were African, rooted
his great and incisive intellectual insights,
trivialised his own problematique by
in Africa yet fully aware and critically
his uncompromising stand on matters of
presenting it in a Charlie Chaplain
appreciative of intellectual discourses
principle and his steadfastness on rigour
fashion. (One wonders why but also
elsewhere.2 He refused intellectual hege-
and unwavering commitment to national one recalls that in his prison notes
monies, in particular those that proclaim
liberation and social emancipation. He Gramsci affected certain verbal pos-
universal truth and wisdom regardless of
refused to be taken in by the fashions tures; so it could be with anybody.)
time or space. He detested racism but ap-
and fads among intellectuals – usually But, as is known, Charlie Chaplin’s
preciated the ‘anti-racist racism’ (Senghor’s
spawned by Western academia and mim- message was always very profound
phrase) of African nationalism as an as-
icked by us in Africa. I marvelled at and to the disquiet of the Americans who
sertion of African humanity against cen-
enjoyed his think pieces in the CODESRIA found it necessary to deport him back
turies of oppression and humiliation. He
Bulletin. I read and zealously circulated to his native England.
was clear of the bourgeois nature of anti-
his sharp rejoinders to Achille Mbembe’s
Irrespective of the reaction Shivji elic- colonial and post-independence African
postmodernist writings on Africanity. I
ited from his colleagues (irritation from nationalism but appreciated and cel-
quote and requote his excellent piece re-
Mandaza and disgust from Anyang’ ebrated the historical role of national in-
viewing the debate on democracy be-
Nyong’o if only with his ‘hackneyed dependence as ‘the greatest political
tween Thandika Mkandawire and
terms’), his diagnosis is more correct achievement by Africans’. He called it ‘an
Anyang’ Nyong’o. He did not pull
than most and, theoretically, is better
unprecedented collective fulfilment’.3
punches in his analysis of his colleagues
founded than that of his detractors.
whom he nevertheless respected and en- For instance, on liberalism and impe- As a person, Archie was modest but
gaged with. Little did I realise before I read rialism or ‘fashionable bandwagons’ proud. In relation to those with whom he
this piece that Archie had read my short of the West, his observations are valid disagreed, he did not bicker behind their
CODESRIA Bulletin, Nos 3 & 4, 2008 Page 6
backs but told them to their face. I occa- bly defended historical materialism and Notes
sionally met him at Thandika’s place in used it with great originality to understand
1. ‘Theory of Democracy and the African
Dakar. It was a great intellectual treat. the burning issues of the continent.
Discourse; Breaking Bread with my Fellow-
From Thandika you got intellectual provo-
Archie’s oral and written interventions travellers’, in Chole, Eshetu and Jibrin Ibra-
cations, references to great progressive
were short, simple, sharp, witty and pithy him (eds) (1995). Democratisation
movies, tips on the use of a computer.
but never ‘sweet’ in the sense of being Processes in Africa: Problems and Pros-
From Archie you got controversies and
flattery. He rarely called a spade a spade pects, Dakar: CODESRIA.
heresies accompanied by choice wines.
or an instrument to cut with but used it
2. Out of curiosity, I counted the author entries
One could never predict Archie’s posi-
to illustrate its sharpness. Reading him,
in Archie Mafeje’s 1992 book of essays (In
tion on intellectual and political contro-
you could never fail to recognise a spade
Search of An Alternative: A Collection of
versies. But one could always be sure that
when you saw one. I always wished I
Essays on Revolutionary Theory and
it would be from the class standpoint of
could emulate his style, at least the brevity
Politics, Harare: SAPES) and unsurprisingly
the oppressed and exploited. Archie was
and clarity, if not the sharpness, but
found three-fourth of the entries were
not ashamed of his Marxist outlook. Even
never succeeded.
African.
during the heyday of neo-liberalism when
many former African Marxist scholars In memory of Archie Mafeje, the giant of 2. ‘African Philosophical Projections and
uncritically turned postmodernists or sub- an African intellectual, I keep this Prospects for the Indigenisation of Political
alterns or culturalists, Archie indefatiga- tribute short. and Intellectual Discourse’, in ‘In Search of
an Alternative’, pp .9–10.
Archibald Monwabisi Mafeje: A Vignette
Introduction panding international capital has been
Mafeje will be remembered by those who crucial for the emergence of modern
knew him for a million and one things, Kwesi Kwaa Prah cosmopolitanism. Twentieth-century fas-
and those of us who had the privilege of CASAS cists associated cosmopolitanism with
knowing him in different situations and Cape Town, South Africa internationalism and hated every bit of it.
climes for three to four decades and more Internationalism for them was anathema
will recognize in his character a vibrant and a cruel term of abuse.
smugly and too easily this heritage of ex-
and sublime cosmopolitanism that was I met Mafeje during the opening of the
pansion has been translated as ‘we dis-
rare. It was not a feature of his make-up 1970s when he was teaching at the Insti-
covered the world’. That glib, self-adula-
that jumped into the face of the observer. tute of Social Studies in The Hague. I was
tory assumption and all that it carries in
Indeed, it could easily be missed or un- at that point based in Amsterdam but com-
train has provided an unspoken fillip for
derestimated. But any close and careful muting to Heidelberg every fortnight to
those who will argue that without appre-
appreciation of the personality would not teach. We were, I believe, introduced by
ciating where we all are and what we all
have failed to perceive his almost effort- Ernst Feder who was a colleague of
have to offer, it is difficult to see how we
less worldliness. Most people knew him Archie’s. After telephonic contact, Mafeje
can be world citizens. Can you be part of
as Archie. Only few knew his second name agreed to visit me in Amsterdam.
a world you do not know? Only by sub-
Monwabisi (literally, one who makes oth-
mitting yourself to a universalist morality The rendezvous was Reinders, a so-
ers happy).
and ethos – a cultural openness which called ‘brown café’ (a traditional looking
I would like to understand a cosmopoli- celebrates all. wooden interior-décor Dutch café) in the
tan to be a ‘citizen of the world’ in the heart of Amsterdam; on the Leidseplein
This moral dimension of cosmopolitanism
core meaning of the idea as expressed by to be exact. It was a popular haunt of the
has been eloquently and superbly argued
the classical Greek cynic, Diogenes, in the arty set and their regular meeting and ‘wa-
by Kwame Anthony Appiah in his
4th century BC. ‘I am a citizen of the world’ tering hole’. My memory tells me that all
Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a World of
were his words. He was making this pro- the big names in the Amsterdam art world
Strangers (2006). Today, it is as James
nouncement in a world in which Greeks including Harry Mullisch the writer,
Morris somewhere writes, ‘contemporary
saw themselves as the centre of all things. Robert Jasper Grootveld the high priest
orthodoxy. There are many who will ar-
From the fifteenth century onwards with of the anti-establishmentarian anarchist
gue that Ubuntu represents a localized
the European voyages of expansion and Provo Movement, Jan Telting the painter,
traditional African expression of this ethos
the early beginnings of globalization, the Piet Leeuwaarden the arch-hippie, Art
by those who, like Aimé Cesaire, say:
world became increasingly one unit, with Veldhoon the painter and many others
‘Hurrah for those who never invented
the West as the centre. made it a regular stop in town. If you
anything, who never explored anything,
Cosmopolitanism has for long been seen who never discovered anything.’ For wanted to know ‘the scene’,you ‘hung
as largely a western sentiment. Too Marx the opening up of societies by ex- around’. It was a very cosmopolitan and
‘free’ place. These were years following
CODESRIA Bulletin, Nos 3 & 4, 2008 Page 7
the heady 1960s when Amsterdam was sical literature was equally not inconsid- was during the 1960s, when they refused
regarded as the most libertarian city in erable, although he hardly made a show to offer him a lectureship.
Europe and when the old description of of this.
Mafeje was a very kind and considerate
migrant Jews fleeing from the excesses of
In the Netherlands, I remember that I was person. He had a lively sense of humour,
the Spanish inquisition in the closing dec-
invited to his rooms for dinner in The but his normal quietness often masked
ade of the fifteenth century found a new
Hague with the Kenyan Paul Adhu Awiti. this quality. His kindness was equally
meaning in our times as Mokkum or ‘Je-
It was superb. I suspect that this culinary matched by loyalty to his friends. He val-
rusalem of the North’.
skill was one of Archie’s accomplish- ued friendship and stood by his friends,
It was a late summer afternoon, and I was ments that not many people knew about. but he did not suffer fools. Archie’s
sitting and waiting at the front of I have been informed that in his home in cosmopolitanism was matched by a fer-
Reinders, looking in the direction of the Cairo he was very often and easily in vent Africanism, which was worn unob-
tram-stop, which was within view and charge of the kitchen. trusively but staunchly. He was also out-
barely a few metres away. I did not have standingly critical of political double-
His robust intellect was particularly ob-
to wait too long. Almost at the appointed speak and other shortcomings of the Af-
servable in debates where his often placid
time a tallish, gaunt but ramrod African, rican political elite. This did not endear
exterior belied a stridently combative spirit
carrying his head aloft, stepped out of him to many elements in the African Na-
and expression. Sometimes this
one of the trams coming from the direc- tional Congress of South Africa. His origi-
polemically acute approach came across
tion of the Central Station. He rolled for- nal political home had been in the Unity
as abrasive, but it was an abrasiveness
ward with an easy and steady gait. I was Movement in the Cape. It was from the
that was measured and hardly licentious.
looking in his direction, and he appeared philosophical inclinations of this group-
to inquire from a newspaper seller the lo- I was instrumental in getting Archie to ing that his early appreciation of political
cation of Reinders, because the two Namibia during the very early years of Marxism and the intellectual rudiments of
swung in our direction and the newspa- Namibia’s independence to work in de- cosmopolitanism were possibly acquired.
per man pointed to Reinders. I immedi- veloping an implementational strategy for
All these multifaceted dimensions of his
ately assumed that this was Mafeje, and I the research wings of the new University
personality contributed to giving him a
stood up to meet him. He had calmly pen- of Namibia. I had, as a consultant for the
cosmopolitan make-up. He grew up in the
etrating and appraising eyes. He wore a new Vice Chancellor’s office, produced
Cape, in South Africa, and spent a good
vague straggling beard and had enough the structural concepts and theoretical
part of his life in Cairo. Our mutual friend,
self-possession to carry a beautifully designations for the research wings of the
Helmi Sharawy, informed me that Archie
crafted handbag. The air about him was university. However, I left shortly before
held his own in the super-chaotic traffic
not macho but also not effeminate. he arrived. For some reason he could not
of Cairo, in word and deed. I am not sure
hit it off with the interests on the ground
We exchanged greetings and initial pleas- if Cecil Rhodes would have counted the
and in the ensuing differences that
antries and took seats on the patio of the successful migration of a ‘native’ from
emerged he was in some cases a casualty.
café. By his own account, Archie had Cape Town to Cairo as part of his Cape to
Many of the interests on the ground in
settled well in The Hague but was not Cairo project, but Archie achieved much
the then University of Namibia were not
altogether happy about some of the atti- of Rhodes’s project in more ways than
very welcoming to an African of Archie’s
tudes he encountered at the institute. one, and had a roaring family life in Cairo
calibre, and considerations they had, I
When the conversation drifted to the fact with his partner Shahida and daughter.
suspect, for consultancies and other
that we were literally a stone’s throw from
things probably made them fearful of a I was in Cairo when the news of his death
the Rijksmuseum he strongly expressed
new and senior African presence in their arrived and had the opportunity to attend
the wish to visit the museum in the not
midst. Archie returned to Cairo. his funeral in the Omar Makram mosque
too distant future and went on to extol
in the heart of the city. It was extraordi-
the excellence of the Dutch Masters. We Later, after the collapse of apartheid in
narily moving to observe the wonderful
also discussed the Van Gogh Museum and South Africa, he applied to be appointed
crop of the Cairenne intellectual class as-
the eccentricities or rather madness of to the new A.C. Jordan Chair at the Uni-
sembled to honour and pay homage to
Van Gogh. It distinctly occurred to me versity of Cape Town. Again, interests
his life. They included Tayeb Saleh, the
that there were not many African academ- fearful of transformation and, I am recently
well-known Sudanese–Egyptian writer;
ics who were at home in such subjects. informed, partly linked to elements from
Kamal Bahaa Eldeen, former Minister of
the Namibian scene, colluded to bar his
On another occasion, elsewhere, he dis- Education; Prof. Hussam Issa, Politbureau
entrance into the university. I had written
played a sophisticated and totally uncom- Member of the Nasserist Party; A.G.
a reference, on his request, which was
mon knowledge of European wines. I am Shukr, Politbureau Member of the Pro-
politely acknowledged but carried little
myself quite at home with such knowl- gressive Party; Ragaa el Naqash, critic of
effective weight in the corridors of power
edge, but in the social science circles of Arabic literature; Prof. I. el Esawy and Prof.
and influence in the university. This was
Africa I have not come across anyone Helmi Sharawy. Archie managed success-
the second time the establishment of the
who could rival Archie in this respect. fully to pack all these different strands
University of Cape Town had visited
Archie’s knowledge of the Western clas- and impulses into his life and character.
shabby treatment on him. The first time
CODESRIA Bulletin, Nos 3 & 4, 2008 Page 8
Archie Mafeje and the Social Sciences in Africa
T
he death of Archie Mafeje in March did this was that the concept had no
2007 was a great shock to many boundaries because it was widely diffused
African scholars and political ac- Dani W. Nabudere in space, especially in conditions of im-
tivists. There is no doubt that Mafeje was Makerere University proved communication; and for this rea-
one of the leading African social scien- Kampala, Uganda son it could not be used as a designating
tists who tried to deconstruct anthropol- category in social analysis. Secondly, he
ogy while trying to construct a new re- also declined to use the concept ‘soci-
anthropologists who challenged the dis-
search methodology that was free from ety’ for the same reasons in developing
cipline of colonial anthropology, which
these colonially inspired disciplines the theory of analysing interlacustrine
was regarded as the ‘handmaiden of co-
within wider social science discourses to kingdoms of East Africa because there
lonialism.’ At the eighth General Assem-
explain the African context. On the politi- could be ‘societies’ within societies.
bly of CODESRIA held in Dakar, Senegal,
cal side, there is also no doubt that Mafeje
in 1995, he even dared to declare anthro- In many ways, therefore, it can be said
was a committed pan-Africanist who was
pology a ‘dead’ discipline in Africa. In- that Prof. Mafeje made a real break with
dedicated to African emancipation and lib-
deed, he went ahead to write a monograph, the anthropological past in writing this
eration, and a great teacher and crusader
which CODESRIA published as Mono- book for it enabled him to problematise
for African political, intellectual and cul-
graph Series 4/96, to make good his claims both anthropological and Marxist
tural freedom. His achievements remain
and to give his African fellow-anthropolo- concepts in trying to develop a new un-
great landmarks upon which young Afri-
gists an opportunity to ‘disabuse’ him.1 derstanding of analysing dynamic
can scholars can build to establish that new
changes in African ‘social formations’. His
approach that he fought to set in motion in Mafeje went further to demonstrate that
analysis of the ethnography of the
African knowledge production, intellec- the ultimate concern for writing his essay
interlacustrine kingdoms established a
tual freedom and social responsibility. was to interrogate anthropology as a dis-
theory of ‘social formations’ of these king-
cipline and challenge its credentials for
I met Archie Mafeje in the heyday of the doms by relying on a discursive method
claiming to study ‘the other’ as a ‘thing
struggle for African liberation at the Uni- that built on local histories with a strong
of the past’ as well as its claim to deal
versity of Dar es Salaam, where he was a interpretive force emanating from the lo-
with the present ‘without making invidi-
professor of sociology, from 1969 and later cal peoples’ epistemologies and ‘hidden
ous distinction betweens between the
in Harare. At each of these places, he was knowledge’. Based on this theory, he ar-
Third World subjects and those of the
a vibrant progressive debater and a de- gued that the pastoralists in the ten king-
imperialist countries’ (Mafejoe 1996:1).
fender of the interests of the working peo- doms of the interlacustrine region, which
The problematic he set for himself in the
ple. He did not take an open political had both segmentary and centralising
essay was to explore the deconstruction
position in favour of any political party tendencies, challenged the notion that
of anthropology ‘with reference to the ex-
or liberation movement in South Africa, these kingdoms were ‘invaded’ by the
colonial world’ and as this emanated from
the country of his birth, although he was empire-building Hamitic pastoralists from
the North and place the deconstruction
known to take a Trotskyite activist posi- pre-dynastic Egypt. Instead he recon-
debate within the African context. This
tion that operated under the Unity Move- structed a history of their ‘social forma-
enabled him to commit himself ‘irrevoca-
ment of South Africa, which had a number tion’ that built on local processes of po-
bly’ to adopting a different paradigm in
of student organisations. But in academia, litical action based on a detailed ethnog-
the application of ethnography in Africa.
he took a broad position, which enabled raphy in which both the pastoralists and
He did so with the writing of his book:
him to maintain contact with the general sedentary communities converged
The Theory and Ethnography of African
intellectual community. (Mafeje, 1991:20).2
Social Formations: The Case of the
Mafeje’s early contribution as a young Interlacustrine Kingdoms, which he From this, Professor Mafeje was able to
anthropologist was a path-breaking arti- wrote in 1986 but which was published in challenge the whole notion of a particular
cle he wrote in 1970 for the Journal of 1991. Indeed, this book can be taken as pastoral community that came down from
Modern African Studies entitled ‘The Mafeje’s magnus opus in that it laid out the north with longhorn cattle associated
Ideology of Tribalism’, which stimulated the research approach that he recom- with the Hima/Tutsi people as a racial
wide-ranging debate challenging the an- mended for Africa, and therefore his con- group with any special political charac-
thropological concept of ‘a dual economy’ tribution has to be judged from here. teristics for introducing a new political
and the alleged static nature of African system. His research proved that such
Mafeje explains that he used the inter-
society that the concepts of ‘tribe’ and cattle could be found in Sierra Leone, and
lacustrine ‘social formation’ both as a
‘tribalism’ implied. Throughout this early along the River Niger and as far south as
synthesis of his previous theoretical and
period, Mafeje argued that African soci- Namibia. He pointed out that the indig-
ideological explorations and as a testing
ety was composed of social classes just enous Bantu agriculturalists and the
ground for his deconstructionist ideas,
like any other society by introducing Nilotic Babiito peoples had a pastoral his-
first by moving a way from the concept
Marxist concepts of class and class for- tory and therefore the process of state
‘culture’ as an analytical category that
mation. He became one of the African formation in the Bunyoro Empire could
was used in anthropology. The reason he
CODESRIA Bulletin, Nos 3 & 4, 2008 Page 9
only be understood in terms of dialectical in their use of ‘social formation’ as mean- als by virtue of their ascribed identi-
social relations and interactions, which ing an ‘articulation of modes of produc- ties are assigned categorical statuses
evolved between the two modes of pro- tion’. Instead he preferred the use of ‘so- and roles (Ibid.).
duction and existence. He pointed out: cial formation’ as meaning ‘the articula-
Having clarified his second ‘key concept’
tion of the economic instance and the in-
of ‘ethnography’, Mafeje declared it to
The Bairu provided the agricultural
stance of power’.
be ‘radically different from that of the
base and services and the pastoralists,
relieved of any onerous duties but in The counter-argument for this departure Northern theorists or conventional an-
control of prestige goods, indulged was that one could not use an articula- thropologists’. Referring to the results of
themselves, turned the latter into a tion of an abstract concept such as ‘mode his investigation of the interlacustrine
mechanism for political control and of production’ to designate ‘the same kingdoms, he states:
ritual mystification. This phenom- concrete social reality they are meant to
It is these texts that I refer to as ethnog-
enon, involving the same social cat- explain’. The other counter-argument was
raphy. They are socially and historically
egories, got repeated in five other that Balibar’s and Amin’s use of the con-
determined, i.e. they can be authored
kingdoms in the interlacustrine re- cept ‘mode of production’ had an organi-
and altered by the same people over
gions of Ankore, Burundi, Rwanda, sational referent in which economics and
time or similar ones could be authored
Buhaya and Buzinza (Mafeje 1991:22).
politics were determinant, which could be
by people with a different cultural
The British anthropologist John Beattie subsumed under the concept of ‘power’. background under similar conditions.
had argued that when the Babiito dynasty Therefore in order to ‘balance’ the Marx- Therefore ‘context’ is most critical for
took over from the Chwezi dynasty in the ist concept of economic instance: ‘I in- their codification (Mafeje 1996:34).
Bunyoro Kitara empire, these new rulers vented what would have been “power
If Professor Mafeje is therefore to be cred-
‘appeared strange and uncouth to the in- instance”’ but this proved, according to
ited or discredited with the claim of hav-
habitants’ and had to be instructed in the Mafeje, to be too awkward linguistically.
ing made a leap from the discipline of
manners appropriate to rulers of cattle- So, instead he settled for the ‘instance of
anthropology as a ‘handmaiden of colo-
keeping and milk drinking. From the eth- power’, which was actually inconsistent
nialism’ to ‘ethnography’ as defined by
nographical evidence he collected from with the Marxist demarcation between
him above, it is in the attempt he made in
the people, Mafeje found that the Babiito ‘structure’ and ‘superstructure’. Having
developing a thesis based on these ‘texts’
were by tradition pastoralists and could made up his mind, he adopted ‘social for-
as an approach that was suitable for ex-
not have been ‘ignorant of cattle-keep- mation’ as his unit of analysis par excel-
plaining African conditions. Mafeje sums
ing’ although it was likely that they were lence. This is how the study of the
up this attempt when he concludes:
‘ignorant of the kingship institutions, interlacustrine kingdoms, became a series
which in Bunyoro centred on sacred herds of ‘social formations-in-the-making’, The final methodological lesson that
and milk diet for the kings’. which interbred with each other in such a can be drawn from the study is that
way that the study explained how these
detailed ethnographic knowledge
Mafeje’s analysis and that of Peter Rigby,
independent kingdoms would have be- helps us to avoid mechanistic inter-
who investigated the Masaai of Tanzania
come one social formation or state had it pretations. Far from opening the way
using a phenomenological Marxist ap-
not been for the colonial intervention. to relativism or particularism, it ena-
proach, demonstrated that the organic
This proved that ‘social formations’, ac- bles us to decode what might strike
relationship between people of different
cording to Mafeje, had ‘extendable in- us at first sight as so many different
modes of existence and culture must in-
stances depending on the nature of inter- things and, thus, puts us in a position
form any analysis of society as a dialecti-
vening social and political forces whether where we can discover hidden unities.
cal process of social and economic rela-
internal or external’. For instance, we discovered that
tionships. The social formation that arises ‘tribal’ names were used, not to iden-
historically must be demonstrated to arise Professor Mafeje continued to develop tify tribes, but to designate status-cat-
out of these organic social relations and his theory and ethnography of African egories in non-tribal formations, for
political actions. This can only be arrived social formations by clarifying that as units example, ‘Bairu’, ‘Batutsi’. Further-
at by use of a detailed ethnographic in- of analysis his ‘social formations’ were not more, ethnographic detail showed
vestigation instead of hypothetical a pri- defined according to their ethnography that contrary to stereotypes that
ori constructions based on one’s ideo- but according to their ‘modes of organisa- pastoralists were the founders of the
logical convictions. tion’, so it did not matter which people be- kingdoms in the interlacustrine region,
longed to a particular social formation, but neither the pastoralists nor the agri-
In arriving at this method of concep-
rather ‘what they were actually doing in culturalists can take credit for this.
tualisation, Mafeje tried to discard old
their attempts to assert themselves’: Likewise ethnographic detail forbids
anthropological concepts as well as pol-
us to treat pastoralism and cultivation
ishing Marxist concepts by choosing ‘so- It struck me that in the ensuing social as things apart. The kingdoms were a
cial formation’ as his unit of analysis and struggles people try to justify them- result of a dynamic synthesis of so-
discarding the concepts ‘culture’ and ‘so- selves and not so much their causes cial elements that were drawn from
ciety’. By interrogating the use of the con- which remain hidden. They do this by both traditions and the prevailing
cept ‘ethnography’ by the Comaroffs,3 he authoring particular texts which give modes of existence within them served
adopted ‘social formation’ and his own them and others certain identities as politically controlled alternatives.
notion of ‘ethnography’ as ‘key con- which in turn become the grammar of … These discoveries enable us to
cepts’ in writing his book. In doing this, the same texts, the rules of the game, generate more objective codes and to
he departed from Balibar and Samir Amin or, if you like, the modus operandi, in put into proper perspective the his-
a social discourse in which individu-
CODESRIA Bulletin, Nos 3 & 4, 2008 Page 10
torical and ethnographic intricacies of dualistic ‘dialectical opposites’ inherent the peoples’ texts so that he can decode
African societies. (Mafeje 1991:128–9) in colonial anthropology, so that instead them and make them understandable to
of the ‘subject/object’ epistemology of the other scholars as systemised inter-
Mafeje’s claim here is epistemic, if indeed
the coloniser, ‘us’ and ‘them’, we have a pretations of existing but ‘hidden knowl-
it is true, for it destroys the way colonial
‘synthesis’ or a ‘convergence’ of social edge’. But in such a case how different is
anthropology and imperial ethnology
elements that are drawn, in the case of he from the colonial scholar who claims
were used to classify human societies
the interlacustrine kingdoms, from both to be ‘neutral’ and ‘objective’? This is
according to their basic characteristics.
traditions of the pastoralists and agricul- perhaps the legacy that young scholars
These approaches denied the colonised
turalists, into an interrelated whole ex- must grapple with. But it is clear that Pro-
‘objects’ knowledge of themselves since
pressed in the existence of the kingdom. fessor Mafeje made a definite contribu-
they were regarded as ‘primitive’ and
This means Mafeje had discovered a new tion in his lifetime in developing a new
‘backward’. On the other hand, ‘ethnog-
epistemology behind the ‘hidden knowl- social science and philosophy in discard-
raphy’ as used by Mafeje here was an
edge’, which he was able to retrieve through ing colonial anthropology.
end product of social texts that were
the ‘ethnological’ approach or what he calls
authored by the people themselves as
‘ethnological knowledge’ of the colonial Notes
knowledge-makers. In this approach, all
‘object’ who now becomes the subject.
that a scholar does is to study the peo- 1. A. Mafeje (1996), Anthropology and
ples’ texts so that he/she can decode them But Mafeje operates as a neutral researcher Independent Africans: Suicide or End of an
and make them understandable to other or scholar standing outside the new epis- Era? CODESRIA Monograph Series 4/96,
scholars as systemised interpretations of temology because he informs us that in Dakar: CODESRIA.
existing but ‘hidden knowledge’. Accord- discarding the old concepts and ap- 2. A. Mafeje (1998), The Theory and
ing to Mafeje, his approach ‘marked a proaches he also adopted a ‘discursive Ethnography of African Social Formations:
definite break with the European episte- method’, which was not predicated on The Case of the Interlacustrine Kingdoms,
mology of subject/object’. any epistemology but was ‘reflective of a Dakar: CODESRIA. 3 J. & J. Comaroff
So with Mafeje’s approach, we have certain style of thinking’. It is with this (1972), Ethnography and the Historical
achieved a philosophic break with the ‘style of thinking’ that he is able to study Imagination, Boulder: Westview Press,
Debating Archie Mafeje and Wole Soyinka:
Can Africa Colonize Itself?
My most famous debates with fellow Af- On the other hand, Archie Mafeje inter-
rican intellectuals were, firstly, with Wole preted my concept of ‘Africa’s self-colo-
Ali A. Mazrui
Soyinka, the Nobel Laureate in Literature nization’ as an attempt on my part to fa-
Binghamton University
and, secondly, with Archie Mafeje, the cilitate Europe’s recolonization of Africa.
USA
eminent South African anthropologist. Soyinka regarded my ‘triple heritage’ as a
The debates with both intellectual adver- Trojan Horse for a Muslim colonization
saries were brutal – almost no hods barred! of Africa. Mafeje denounced my concept
But what did my two major debates with
of Africa’s recolonization of its own failed
My personal relationship with Wole Wole Soyinka have in common with my
states as a Trojan Horse for the return of
Soyinka was substantially mended when single debate with Archie Mafeje? My
Pax Britannica and related European in-
I invited him to a conference on my cam- first debate with Soyinka was conducted
trusions.
pus in Binghamton, New York, and he in the columns of Transition magazine
agreed to come unconditionally. I had also (originally founded in Kampala but more In reality, my concept of Africa’s triple her-
invited General Yakubu Gowon, former recently based at Harvard under the itage was about a convergence of three civi-
Head of State in Nigeria, who had once editorship of Henry Louis Gates Jr). My lizations in contemporary African experi-
imprisoned Wole Soyinka during the Ni- single public debate with Archie Mafeje ence – Africanity, the penetration of Islam
gerian civil war. Both the General and the was conducted in the pages of CODESRIA and the impact of Western civilization. In
Nobel Laureate came to Binghamton, and Bulletin, based in Dakar, Senegal. spite of Soyinka himself, Nigeria already
we mended our fences. had more Muslims than any Arab coun-
. My first debate with Soyinka arose try. The size of the Nigerian population that
With regard to my personal relationship out of his misinterpretation of my tel-
was already Muslim was larger than the
with Archie Mafeje, we never really had a evision series, The Africans: A Triple
Muslim population of Egypt. My televi-
formal intellectual reconciliation. But I Heritage (BBC/PBS, 1986). Basically,
sion series was trying to understand this
would like to believe that my tribute to Wole Soyinka interpreted my concept
triple heritage, rather than promoting it.
him in my presentation at the CODESRIA of ‘Africa’s triple heritage’ as an at-
conference on ‘Pan Africanism and the tempt to facilitate or legitimize a kind In fact, far from emphasizing the Islamic
Intellectuals’, in December 2003, was at of Muslim colonization of Africa. part of Nigeria when I issued invitations
least an olive branch from me. for my Binghamton conference on ‘Glo-