Within the Context of World History
Racism and misconceptions about the peoples of Africa have resulted in the neglect of Africa’s historical reality ever since the field of history began to emerge as a structured discipline during the eighteenth century (Reynolds, “So Many Africas, So Little Time: Doing Justice to Africa in the World History Survey”). Since Greek and Roman times and up until the European Renaissance there was mutual respect between Europeans and the subjects of black kingdoms they met (Clarke ‘Why African History?”). By the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, however, most European historians, philosophers and political scientists had adopted a Eurocentric attitude vis- à-vis the peoples of Africa. It is this shift of attitudes toward Black Africa that has caused such deep misunderstanding of African history and it is the reason why to this date the great majority of American students are largely ignorant about the rich history of Africa. The following essay will attempt to explore the reasons why African history has experienced so much difficulty being incorporated in the web of world history.
One reason for such shift in attitudes according to historian Basil Davidson (“European Distortion of African History”), is that prejudice blinded Europeans to the achievements of cultures that differed significantly from their conception of civilization. The Atlantic slave trade was no small contributor to the formation of such attitudes on the part of Europeans. By deluding themselves into thinking that blacks were less than humans devoid of reasoning they could justify enslaving them for their own benefit. Attitudes of superiority had been shaping since the late fifteenth century when European explorers discovered Black Africa south of the Sahara. They came to associate Africa as Black Africa, as the “Dark Continent” (Mazrui, 25). The first successful voyages of explorations also boosted European feelings of self-confidence and superiority because such journeys opened the riches of the Americas and the doors of Asian trade to the Europeans. Another contributor to such attitudes of superiority came from the many scientific and technological developments that helped Europeans achieve impressive industrial and economic growth, a tendency that reached its peak during the Industrial Revolution. Europeans were so convinced of the superiority of their culture and civilization that, they refused to accept the fact that Black Africans in particular could have a history of their own. Davidson gives concrete examples of the attitudes embodied in Europeans thinking about Black Africa during the nineteenth century. For instance, he summarizes philosopher Friedrich Hegel’s opinions about Africa as follows: “Africa is the land where men are children Africa is no historical part of the world. Therefore, we should forget Africa” (“European Distortions”). English explorer Richard Burton stated that the study of the Negro is “the study of man’s rudimental mind. He is rather a degeneracy from the civilized man” (“European Distortions”). Explorer Samuel Baker wrote that “human nature viewed in its crudest state as seen amongst African savages is quite on the level with that of the brute and not to be compared with the noble character of the dog” (“European Distortions’). Davidson also points out that such disrespect for African civilizations and cultures was not always prevalent among Europeans: He asserts that Europeans in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries forgot what earlier Europeans were well aware of: the fact that kingdoms flourished in West Africa that were as magnificent and as well governed as any medieval kingdom. For example, because of its control of the gold trade and its political stability, the Mali Empire became one of the wealthiest areas of Sub-Saharan Africa. By establishing extensive networks of trade the Mali Empire linked the peoples of West Africa with those of North Africa and the Mediterranean basin (Bentley, 439).The reports left by traders and diplomates who visited these West African kingdoms indicate that they assumed no attitudes of racial superiority. Davidson concludes that racism is a modern sickness unleashed by unquenchable European ambitions as they forcibly removed thousands of Negroes from their homelands to work in the plantations of the West Indies and the American colonies. It was the forced labor of the African diaspora that propelled Europe’s and America’s massive economic growth during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.
Reynolds (“So Many Africas”) provides five additional reasons why African history has failed to fully integrate into the context of world history. He points to the representations of Africa in the media: there is the overrepresentation of Maasai people in commercials, masking the fact that Africa like Asia is a multicolored continent of mostly Black Africans south of the Sahara and predominantly brown Africans north of the dessert (Mazrui, 25)., Television networks contribute to a negative depiction of Africa by constantly bombarding their viewers with appeals for help by showing images of starving black children on late night shows. Even well-established newspapers such as The New York Times focus their coverage of Africa almost entirely on natural disasters; a case in point would be the recent Ebola epidemic. The fact that the generation of new knowledge about African history is primarily catered to highly trained specialists and not to generalists who comprise the majority of history teachers at the high school level is second reason why a more accurate presentation of Africa’s history fails to reach the classroom. Thirdly, in contrast to these negative images of Africa, there is the charming picture of idealized images of Historical Africa as a land of egalitarian societies living in perfect equilibrium with themselves and with their natural environment. Another difficulty in incorporating African history in the context of world history is the political nature of the discipline, for teaching a more accurate representation of African history involves challenging teachers’ and students’ notions of racial identity. Students would be forced to questions deeply ingrained assumptions and sensibilities. Encouraging students to confront controversial topics in order to gain more accurate perceptions about the role of Africa in world history creates unwarranted stress for teachers who usually receive no reward for their efforts to teach history correctly. Thus they conclude it is safer to dwell on shallow notions about Africa which students already know creating a safe atmosphere for all. Finally, the fact that the teaching of history is such a daunting task due to the depth of information forces teachers to oversimplify concepts not only about African history, but about history in general.
Through their careful analysis of the place of African history in the context of world history both Reynolds and Davidson raise awareness of the neglect and disrespect that Africa has suffered on the part of scholars of the past and the public at large both present and past. They are keenly aware of the difficulties of presenting an accurate picture of Africa in history classrooms. What teachers should strive to convey to their students is that far from being ahistorical Africa has been an active participant in shaping world history. Clark (“Why African History? “) best captures the role of Africa in the history of humanity: Africa was an integral part of the Mediterranean world of antiquity. It was then cut off from the Mediterranean culture by constant European wars resulting from the rise of Islam. Before these events, indigenous civilizations had flourished in African lands. Africa returned to the world history scene when the Arabs penetrated North Africa, West Africa, and the Sudan. The continent continued to play an important role in world history when European and American slave traders ravaged the continent forcibly removing thousands of African blacks to serve in the plantations of North America and the West Indies. Finally, Europe’s drive to build empires brought missionaries and colonizers to African lands. They exercised exploitation and control of Africa’s natural resources and imposed their language and religion on the peoples of Africa. After World War II Africa reentered the world stage as a host of independent nations searching for an identity, economic development and a place in the highly volatile post World War II world.
Work Cited
Bentley, Jerry. Traditions & Encounters: A Global Perspective on the Past. Vol. 2 from 1500 to the Present. 5th Ed. 2010. Australia & New Zeeland: McGraw Hill Education,
Clarke, John H. “Why African History?” Department of African & Puerto Rican Latino Studies Hunter College. Web. 23 June, 2016.
Davidson, Basil. “European Distortions of African History.” Online video clip. 8 January, 2008.Web. 22 June, 2016.
Mazrui, Ali A. The Africans A Triple Heritage. Boston: Little Brown and Company, 1986.
Reynolds, Jonathan T. “So Many Africans, So Little Time: Doing Justice to Africa in the World History Survey.” World History Connected. 2004. Web. 22 June, 2016.
