east african archaeology foragers potters smiths and traders

7/30/2019 East African Archaeology Foragers Potters Smiths and Traders

1/5

African Archaeological Review, Vol. 22, No. 2, June 2005 ( C 2005)

DOI: 10.1007/s10437-005-4192-9

Book Review

East African Archaeology: Foragers, Potters, Smiths and Traders. Edited byC. M. Kusimba and S. B. Kusimba. University of Pennsylvania Museum

of Archaeology and Anthropology, Philadelphia (ISBN 1931707618), 2003,

226 pp.

Any volume that features archaeologists of African descent is well worth

a thorough inspection to consider changes that may be taking place within the

discipline. All the more important, then, is this volume which is coedited by a

Kenyan, predominantly features scholars from Kenya and Tanzania, and sets out

to indicate the breadth of archaeological initiatives being undertaken in East Africatoday. Of still greater note is that it is published by a respected western academic

press.

Predictably, a number of papers review the historical development of partic-

ular ideas and seek to suggest new research directions. Kusimba and Kusimba,

drawing on recent research in southern Africa explore a hunting and gathering

tradition in south-eastern Kenya that lasted until very recently and which had

an important role to play in exchange systems with Swahili coastal settlements,

therefore challenging the traditional divide that has emerged between Stone Age

and Iron Age archaeology. Ironically, in Eastern Africa at least, that divide wasin the early stages less well-defined, partly because Louis and Mary Leakey rec-

ognized the need to explore both, and because it has long been recognized that

stone-tool using pastoralists lived alongside early iron-using farming populations.

Karega-Munene reconsiders this Pastoral Neolithic, or Neolithic as he prefers, in

Kenya and northern Tanzania, and in particular considers the role of ceramic stud-

ies. Ultimately he suggests that all proposed ceramic sequences are problematic

and that, rather than attempting to seek simple sequential order, a more com-

plex understanding of ceramics needs to be developed that incorporates notions

of manufacture, use and context, as well as decorative style and that allows theco-existence of distinct ceramic traditions within individual communities. He also

believes that too much emphasis has been placed on herding and that this gloss

masks hunting and gathering and cultivating societies. It is this mosaic of distinct

105

0263-0338/05/0600-0105/0 C 2005 Springer Science+Business Media, Inc.


2/5

106 Book Review

activities stretching across wide ranging environments that he believes lies at the

core of understanding society between 3000 and 1500 bp.

As one might expect the continuity of certain activities has encouraged eth-

noarchaeological research. Thus, Mabulla presents a discussion of his research

with Hadzabe foragers in northern Tanzania, whilst Wandibba takes a cross-

cultural look at contemporary ceramic production in Kenya. Wandibbas study

is largely a consideration of the wide-ranging literature on ceramic production

throughout Kenya, interspersed with observations of bis own. As such it is im-

portant to recognize that this literature is between 20 and 30 years old, effectively

making this study more a history than an ethnoarchaeology. It is also noteworthy

that this paper has no illustrations in contrast with conventional ceramic pub-

lications. In a way this serves Wandibbas interests well, forcing the reader to

disengage with conventional archaeological focuses and to contemplate insteadthe social life of pots. Ultimately he concludes that ceramics are both a rich source

of potential information but are also incredibly complicated. Rather than using

simplistic notions of style to identify putative ethnic groups, archaeologists need

to explore the rich contexts of production use and discard of individual pots: a

much more difficult, yet ultimately much more rewarding focus for study.

In dealing with Hadzabe foragers and in particular their land-use patterns,

Mabulla reveals an excellent, well illustrated, source of data that is and argues that

Hadzabe provide a rich vein for challenging our models of past hunter gatherer

systems. He found that roughly 25% of Hadzabe still practice a mobile foragingmeans of existence, one that has existed for the last 3000 years in interaction

with herders and cultivators. Importantly, Mabulla does recognize the increas-

ingly disadvantaged position of Hadzabe within the modern state, whilst also

allowing the possibility that contemporary foraging patterns may be a relatively

recent artefact of their increasing marginalization. Similar concerns are raised by

Musiba and Mabulla in discussing current management issues in the Ngorongoro

Conservation Area with special reference to extant Maasai populations and to

the archaeological resources at Olduvai and Laetoli. Historically, the position of

Maasai around Ngorongoro has been the subject of much debate in regards ofwhether their presence is detrimental to the animal populations. In recent times,

the desire has been to remove Maasai from the area resulting not infrequently

in men abandoning their families to their fate and heading for Dar es Salaam to

seek employment. This historical landscape, containing pastoralist burial cairns

and many former livestock pens has become a virtual battleground. The globally

renowned Olduvai Gorge and Laetoli find themselves within this zone of conflict

and some facilities have actually been targeted by disaffected Maasai as emblems

of government. Indeed a more organized campaign would be likely to actively

target these very important sites in order to raise global awareness of the plightof Maasai populations in the area. It is therefore highly appropriate that archae-

ologists should be actively engaged in trying to resolve this issue. Musiba and

Mabulla thus make general proposals for the future management of the NCA, with


3/5

Book Review 107

negotiation with, and incorporation of, Maasai into the management framework.

Although this is the paper with the least archaeology in it, this is perhaps the most

important paper of the volume in pointing the way for the future of archaeology

and in particular making it a more relevant discipline to the needs of present day

states.

Two papers deal with issues relating to iron-working, perhaps the one ar-

chaeological topic in which the greatest strides have been made in recent years

in East Africa. Mapunda discusses iron-working traditions in Ufipa (southwest-

ern Tanzania). Well-known to many researchers are the huge natural draft fur-

naces (Malungu). However, Mapunda is also able to demonstrate that two other

iron-producing technologies co-existed with the Malungu technique over the last

five hundred years. This is very important for our understanding of the signifi-

cance of iron smelting, demonstrating that technology appears to have been muchmore flexible than conventionally thought and more importantly that away from

the inevitable emphasis on origins there are much more interesting questions

about technological history to be explored across the African continent. Mapunda

also makes the case for pre-Bantu, Mbonelakuti (Batwa) iron smelting. Although

I do not agree with his argument, nevertheless it is important to explore such

possibilities rather than to be automatically dismissive.

Kusimba and Killick explode another misconception regarding iron produc-

tion in East Africa, namely that iron was unimportant in the emergence of Swahili

towns. By analyzing a comparatively small range of iron artefacts, from just fivesites, it was demonstrated that a significant range in the nature of iron was present.

In conjunction with documentary evidence that indicates that iron was both ex-

ported from and imported to the East African coast Kusimba and Killick are able

to draw out the significance of certain items. For instance, certain items were made

from crucible steel, a technique well-known to have been practiced in India. Were

Swahili towns importing the relatively valued crucible steel? If so why were they

using such a desirable commodity to make nails? Could crucible steel have been

made on the East African coast? Was the relatively good quality East African

bloomery iron being exported to India to facilitate crucible steel manufacture, orwas it being exported elsewhere? That these questions emanate from a single study

and, moreover, that these questions are readily answerable with further analysis,

indicate that archaeologists of the coast need to take archaeometallurgical analysis

much more seriously than has heretofore been the case.

Further revision of coastal archaeology is offered in papers by Chami and

Kessy. Chami discusses his work at the site of Kivinja on the southern Tanzanian

coast. The results of excavations at this site appear to fill in an important gap

that has existed in coastal archaeology. Trading settlements on the East African

coast were previously recognized as dating back to around AD 800 and yet a 1stcentury AD document from Egypt, The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, mentioned

on-going trade with this coast. Kivinja provides evidence of an earlier occupation

of the coast by what are presumed to be Bantu-speaking farmers. Kivinjas earlier


4/5

108 Book Review

occupation consists of Kwale, or Early Iron Working, ceramics, which are found in

association with imported beads, glass and pottery. This site thus ably demonstrates

that the original trading elements on the eastern African coast were not the stone

towns or associated sites, but earlier cultural phenomena As Chami rightly points

out work needs now to focus on detailed exploration of these sites, to explore

settlement organization and economies.

Whilst origins will always remain a popular focus for archaeologists, on the

coast or anywhere else, Kessy manages to demonstrate a fruitful alternative line of

enquiry, exploring changing patterns of settlement on Zanzibar and Pemba. These

islands have over many years had a large number of archaeological sites recorded.

Whilst the recovery strategies of the past were highly selective, particularly focus-

ing on coastal towns, this is still an important exercise. Kessy combines data on

date of occupation, presence of particular features such as mosques and other stonebuildings, quality of harbors and other available resources to construct a picture of

changing cultural landscapes. This image demonstrates the importance of consid-

ering coastal settlements as communities that function as any other archaeological

settlement, by harnessing the resources around them. This is in marked contrast

to the traditional view of coastal settlement as entrepots for international trade

the larger the settlement the greater the amount of trade. Together with Chamis

findings, this paper paves the way for a re-exploration of the archaeology of the

islands, independent of received wisdom on site location and mat fully explores

their vast interior.The book ends with two summary papers. The first by Robertshaw considers

the formation of the state in western Uganda, with specific reference to Bunyoro-

Kitara, and makes a comparison with the Swahili coast. In particular he is keen

to explore theoretical explanations for the emergence and maintenance of states,

recognizing that the debate over exogenous origins is now over and that more

effective explanatory models need to be constructed. In this light Robertshaw ex-

plores a dual-processual theory developed by Blanton et al. (1996) and applied

to Mesoamerica. This is reliant on the distinction between exclusionary and cor-

porate power strategies, which Robertshaw is able to suggest indications of in thearchaeological record. As he recognizes, the value is not in the closeness of fit

of the model but rather in suggesting ways in which archaeological investigation

needs to develop in the future. Nevertheless, (and notwithstanding my own per-

sonal bias) I have considerable problems accepting a theoretical approach that fails

to recognize the peculiar values associated with cattle, a factor that is particularly

acute in many African contexts. In common with many theoretical schemes honed

in non-African contexts there are very real problems in not being able to consider

cattle both as prestige items and as staple finance.

The final paper by Mitchell provides a summary of the volume from a southernAfrican perspective. This looks both at points of note for those working south of the

Zambezi and equally also highlights elements of the research agenda in southern

Africa that could and indeed should be addressed further north. Underscoring this


5/5

Book Review 109

chapter are the fundamental cultural links between eastern and southern Africa,

emphasizing that the divisions that are perceived between the two are primarily

of colonial origin. Most obviously this link is symbolized by the shared Bantu

languages. Conventional reconstructions of the eastern and southern African past

view these languages as evidence of a population spread, emanating from the

Nigeria/Cameroon border, despite, rather than derived from, colonial interpre-

tations of the past intended to alienate African populations from land, to this

volume, a number of contributions implicitly (though not overtly) disagree with

this reconstruction of the past, pointing out the problems of automatically associ-

ating particular material culturepottery, lithics, ironwith particular population

groups. This represents a growing swell of opinion amongst scholars of Eastern

and Southern African opinion that has largely gone unremarked by Africanist

archaeologists and badly needs to be addressed before it becomes a source ofschism.

This book is also representative of a distinct shift in the focus of research.

Most obviously this is made clear by the lack of papers dealing with pre-Holocene

times. Although, some African scholars are participating in research on earlier

time periods they are a distinct minority. More importantly, these papers also

demonstrate the importance of dismantling the crude compartmentalization of the

past based on simple items of material culture. Active hunter gatherer populations

were extant until the nineteenth century and beyond. They interacted with pastoral-

ist and agriculturalist populations. Clearly the past is much less simple than pastreconstructions would have had us believe. This complexity also suggests that the

development of archaeological theory is paramount in making sense of the past. It

is intriguing that none of the chapters by African scholars cite sources from general

archaeological theory, as we would recognize it in the west. If this indicates that

scholars are ignoring problems of archaeological theory and interpretation then

the future of the past in East Africa is bleak. However, if this indicates that scholars

from East Africa are avoiding the quagmire of grand archaeological theory and are

instead generating their own theoretical understandings appropriate to the local

conditions, then the future is much brighter.

REFERENCE CITED

Blanton, R. E., Feinman, G. M., Kowalewski, S. A., and Peregrine, P. N. (1996). A dual-processualtheory for the evolution of Mesoamerican civilization. Current Anthropology 31: 114.

Andrew Reid

Institute of Archaeology

University College London, London

e-mail: [email protected]

east african archaeology foragers potters smiths and traders

Documents