Review of Archaeological Research in Angola
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Afr Archaeol Rev https://doi.org/10.1007/s10437-020-09420-8 REVIEW ARTICLE Review of Archaeological Research in Angola Daniela de Matos & Ana Cristina Martins & João Carlos Senna-Martinez & Inês Pinto & Ana Godinho Coelho & Soraia Santos Ferreira & Luiz Oosterbeek Accepted: 21 December 2020 # The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC part of Springer Nature 2021 Abstract This article examines the historical processes Résumé Cet article examine les processus historiques qui that shaped the development of archaeological practice in ont façonné le développement de la pratique archéologique Angola during the Portuguese colonial period and the en Angola pendant la période coloniale portugaise et par la aftermath of political independence. Using published suite de l’indépendance politique. À l’aide d’ouvrages works, unpublished reports, and photographic records, publiés, de rapports non publiés et de documents we examine the research themes, actors, scholars, and photographiques, nous examinons les thèmes de institutions that influenced archaeological research in the recherche, les acteurs, les chercheurs et les institutions country. We also used documents and museum collec- qui ont influencé la recherche archéologique dans le pays. tions in Angola and Portugal to create a GIS database of Nous avons également utilisé des documents et des collec- Angola’s archaeological findings. This study highlights tions muséales dans diverses institutions en Angola et au the events, personalities, and priorities that motivated Portugal pour créer une base de données SIG des earlier investigations, and the geographical distribution découvertes archéologiques de l’Angola. Cette étude met of prehistoric sites. We hope this study will be a resource en évidence les événements, les personnalités et les for guiding future archaeological research in Angola. priorités qui ont motivé des enquêtes antérieures, et la D. de Matos (*) A. C. Martins : J. C. Senna-Martinez Institute for Archaeological Sciences, Universität Tübingen, UNIARQ, Centro de Arqueologia da Universidade de Lisboa, Rumelinstr. 23, 72070 Tübingen, Germany Faculdade de Letras, Universidade de Lisboa, Alameda da e-mail: [email protected] Universidade, 1600-214 Lisboa, Portugal D. de Matos : L. Oosterbeek A. C. Martins Instituto Terra e Memória, Largo Infante Dom Henrique, Museu Instituto de História Contemporânea, Universidade de Évora, De Arte Pré-Histórica, 6120-721 Mação, Portugal Palácio do Vimioso, Largo Marquês de Marialva, 94, 7002-554 Évora, Portugal D. de Matos : L. Oosterbeek Centro de Geociências da Universidade de Coimbra, Rua Sílvio I. Pinto : A. G. Coelho Lima, Universidade de Coimbra - Pólo II, 3030-790 Coimbra, Museu Nacional de História Natural e da Ciência, Universidade de Portugal Lisboa, Rua da Escola Politécnica, 56, 1250-102 Lisboa, Portugal D. de Matos : L. Oosterbeek S. S. Ferreira Instituto Politécnico de Tomar, Quinta do Contador, Estrada da Museu Regional da Huíla, Ministério da Cultura, Turismo e Serra, 2300-313 Tomar, Portugal Ambiente, Dr. António Agostinho Neto, Bairro Comercial, Lubango, Angola Afr Archaeol Rev répartition géographique des sites préhistoriques. Nous The past decade has witnessed efforts to re-launch espérons que cette étude sera une ressource pour guider archaeological research in Angola. However, these ef- les futures recherches archéologiques en Angola. forts have suffered from lack of a coherent research agenda because of inadequate knowledge of the preced- ing, colonial-era archaeological research programs. It is Keywords History of archaeology . Angola . GIS . challenging to navigate a relatively rich bibliography, Colonial collections . Stone Age . Iron Age mostly published in Portuguese and dispersed across several libraries and archives in Portugal. This review essay serves the purpose of overcoming some aspects of Introduction this challenge. It highlights the major discoveries and research questions that guided archaeological field re- Explorer J. C. Tuckey made the earliest known refer- search in Angola before 1975. ence to the Angolan archaeological heritage. During his expedition across the Congo river in 1816, he sighted a location called Pedra do Feitiço, a rockshelter with Cultures and Geography of Angola impressive engravings on the walls facing the river. Ricardo Severo, a Portuguese engineer and avocational Before African and European contacts began in the ethnologist, documented the first prehistoric artifacts in fifteenth century, what is now Angola was inhabited Angola in 1890. He reported a small collection of by diverse populations and polities with different tradi- polished stone tools that were offered to him by an tions, languages, and subsistence strategies (Disney acquaintance. In 1913, José Leite de Vasconcellos, di- 2009; Thornton 2011). These populations, comprising rector of the Portuguese National Archaeology Muse- foragers, herders, and metallurgists, constituted a rich um, published an article on the prehistoric artifacts from mosaic of cultures and lifeways and were shaped by the Western and Eastern Africa, being kept at the Geolog- diverse landscape and environmental constraints (e.g., ical Services in Lisbon. The article included a bifacial Ervedosa 1980). In the southernmost regions, groups of point and handaxes from Angola. hunter-gatherers shared the landscape with Inevitably, the beginning of archaeology in Angola, agropastoralists well into the eighteenth century as in other parts of Africa, was intertwined with colonial (Almeida 1965). In contrast, more complex agricultural rule. The same actors who served as colonial adminis- societies had already taken roots in the northernmost trators contributed to the institutional building blocks of regions, close to the rainforest, about 3000 years ago. scientific research on African prehistory in Angola and The latter developed novel social dynamics that led to Portugal. The independence of Angola in 1975, follow- the emergence of elites and kingdoms during the four- ing about 14 years of war against Portuguese colonial teenth century (Denbow 2014;Vansina2004). The con- rule, marked a shift in the governance of both countries tacts between these African elites and the Portuguese and consequently a disengagement of the metropolitan began the process of reconfiguring the region’ssocial research institutions from Angola. A few national and mosaic and its integration into a global trading economy foreign figures tried to continue the existing projects and (Heintze 1980). This contact also disrupted several in- even establish new areas of investigation, mostly digenous social structures through the violence associ- through the National Museum of Archaeology of An- ated with the slave trade and the intervention of Portu- gola. However, research efforts declined in the follow- guese trading missions and political interests in the ing decades of civil war in the country. The political and region (Bender 1978;Boxer1961;Miller1988). The social instability, lasting from 1975 through 2002, consolidation of Portuguese colonialism in the Angola undermined scientific and academic structures. Much region during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries of the country’s archaeological heritage was lost during paved the way for a longstanding cultural and linguistic this period of internal conflict and political instability connection between Angolan and Portuguese peoples. through the plundering of museum collections, illegal In the early nineteenth century, the few European trade in antiquities, and the destruction of archaeological colonial settlements in Angola concentrated along the sites. For archaeologists, field research was restricted by coast from São Salvador do Congo (M’banza Congo) to the proliferation of land mines. Benguela. Even at that time, the European knowledge of Afr Archaeol Rev the interior regions was limited to tales and news from a established only a few months earlier in 1879. The few explorers. During the European rush for African meeting’s attendees emphasized the importance of the natural resources in the late nineteenth century, howev- ethnographic records gathered among the “current prim- er, nationalist agendas and growing imperialism of post- itives” to understand the archaeological record of Euro- Napoleonic Europe gave rise to a more effective plan of pean prehistory. Ethnographic research also resonated reconnaissance and occupation of the areas between the among Portuguese scholars because of its potential for Atlantic and Indian coasts. Through the initiative of achieving effective and permanent occupation of the scholars and intellectuals from Portugal, the Lisbon territories disputed with other countries, such as Great Society of Geography (SGL, Table 1) was founded in Britain, Belgium, and Germany (Lobato 1983;Martins 1875. In its early years, the SGL was the most effective 2010a). In a second expedition, Hermenegildo Capelo Portuguese institution in promoting overseas research and Roberto Ivens again represented the commission on and exploration. The development of ethnography, bot- a cross-continental journey which began in Luanda any, and archaeology in Angola was thus an intrinsic (Angola) and ended in Tete (Mozambique), between part of the Portuguese colonial plan. 1884 and 1885. Many of the first reports on the cultural In 1877, explorers Hermenegildo Capelo and heritage, ethnography, and archaeology of central and Roberto Ivens led an expedition from Luanda to the southern