Polities and Political Discourse
Was Mande Already A Segmentary Society in the Middle Ages
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12003114 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Jan Jansen (0000-0003-2277-0586, Leiden University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1996 |
| Volume | 23 |
| Pages | 121-128 |
| Publication date | 1996-01-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | History in Africa (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0361-5413 • E-ISSN: 1558-2744 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.2307/3171937 |
| OpenAlex | W2138104176 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 2 |
Stephan Bühnen has applied some of my ideas to a wider region than southwestern Mali, and shown that the principles of Mande status discourse make possible new interpretations on sources and political processes in the entire West African Sudan. Inspired by Bühnen's analysis, I am convinced that the principles of Mande status discourse may shed light on various processes, varying from political struggles between families to the construction of contemporary ethnic identities. I hope that this reply will not be the end of the discussion on West African genealogies, and that others will join us. Although Bühnen ideas are fruitful, there are also points to contest. Lack of space forces me to focus on three points of Bühnen's critique: the way I elaborate the term “segmentary;” his remarks that I overlook a “bulk of testimony recorded in medieval Arabic sources;” and his complaint of my “inadequate understanding of historical polities.” Since Bühnen accepts my analysis of the Mande genealogies and their relation to nineteenth-century society, I will take this as my point of departure. I will argue that we cannot deduce the “historical reality of polities” for the available material without being misled by our own prejudices and fallacies. The ‘old’ sources are not as one-dimensional as Bühnen thinks: a status claim does not necessarily represent an irreversible hierarchy in a relationship. Bühnen ignores the context, overlooks the dynamics of Mande status discourse, and presupposes his model of chiefdoms. I admit that I am vague about the way I operationalize the term “segmentary,” but a definition of “segmentary” is not necessary to my argument since I focus on a discourse which shows that any relation in Mande is hierarchical as well as based on a dichotomy—for instance, ‘older-younger’ or ‘founder-stranger.’
Archaeology · Chiefdom · CONTEST · Context (archaeology · Ethnic group · Hierarchy · Linguistics · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Swahili · African history and culture analysis · African Studies and Ethnography · African Studies and Geopolitics · Anthropology · History · Law · Philosophy
| Citations per year | 0.17 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2020 - 2020 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |