Kongo Political Culture

This book is a commentary on the political culture of the BaKongo of Lower Congo (now the Democratic Republic of Congo). It is based on MacGaffey's study of ethnographic texts in the KiKongo language, written by young Kongo men between 1914 and 1916 at the instigation of K. E. Laman, a Swedish missi [...]
Visa längre beskrivning

This book is a commentary on the political culture of the BaKongo of Lower Congo (now the Democratic Republic of Congo). It is based on MacGaffey's study of ethnographic texts in the KiKongo language, written by young Kongo men between 1914 and 1916 at the instigation of K. E. Laman, a Swedish missionary. The most important of these texts were written by Lutete Esaya, a teacher at the Lolo and Vungu stations of the Christian and Missionary Alliance. Lutete devoted much of his attention to aspects of Kongo ritual and religious belief, including minkisi and the rituals for the installation of chiefs. The original text of what he had to say about chiefship is printed, with translation notes. The work of other informants is also used. Part one of this book deals with the origin and nature of the texts, the traditions of migration they report, and how the traditions can be read with regard to organisation of trade in the Lower Congo in the 19th century, as well as problems of cognition, ideology, and translation. Part two deals with the ritual of powers as the texts report them. This material is unique in African studies.It shows how deeply implicated Kongo social structure was in the economics of the 19th-century Atlantic slave trade but also argues that indigenous responses to political events from remote times to the post-colonial present has been governed by an evolving cultural tradition. Understanding this tradition requires a fresh look at oral history, the structure and semantics of ritual, the organisation of matrilineal descent, and the place in Kongo thought of philosophical considerations, sociological and cosmological models, and spectacular violence. MacGaffey sees this material as forcing a review of anthropological interpretation and the questioning of the usefulness of common assumptions and perspectives.