Colonial Officers, Anthropologists, and the Making of the Field in Northern Rhodesia, 1937-1960 Author(S): Lynette Schumaker Source: Osiris, 2Nd Series, Vol
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
A Tent with a View: Colonial Officers, Anthropologists, and the Making of the Field in Northern Rhodesia, 1937-1960 Author(s): Lynette Schumaker Source: Osiris, 2nd Series, Vol. 11, Science in the Field (1996), pp. 237-258 Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of The History of Science Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/301934 . Accessed: 28/03/2011 08:02 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpress. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. The University of Chicago Press and The History of Science Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Osiris. http://www.jstor.org A Tent with a View: Colonial Officers, Anthropologists,and the Making of the Field in Northern Rhodesia, 1937-1960 Lynette Schumaker* WgoWHEN THE ANTHROPOLOGISTMax Marwickwas consideringwhere to live while doing fieldworkamong the Ngoni people in 1946, the district commissioner,(Sir) Douglas Hall, suggested a site near a place called Chenjela Mountain.According to J. A. Barnes-who came to do his researchthere when Marwickleft soon after-Hall had suggestedthe site and providedconcrete for the foundationon the understandingthat later it wouldbecome a governmentrest house for touringadministrators. Barnes built the house on a slope of Chenjelawith a view of the bush and scatteredvillages below. He cut down severaltrees to improvethe view, an enterprisehis researchassistant thought a bit peculiar.' In this article I aim to shed light on the interplayof influencesin such incidents by examining anthropologyfrom the perspective of the history of the field sci- ences-those sciences that use fieldwork instead of or in addition to laboratory work.This approachdraws attention to the field itself, the materialside of fieldwork, and the infrastructure,equipment, and work organizationnecessary to conductsci- entific work in a particularfield site. It also allows one to relate scientificpractices to nonscientificpractices occurringin the same field site, such as the sharingof practices between colonial administratorsand anthropologistsconsidered in this study.2Ideally, a field science approachallows one to examine the relationship * Lyn Schumaker,Centre for The History of Science, Technology and Medicine, Mathematics Tower,University of Manchester,Manchester M13 9PL, United Kingdom. Thanks are due to J. Clyde Mitchell for permissionto quote from his papers and to Oliver Saasa, directorof the Institutefor African Studies, for permissionto quote from the Institute'srecords and use the photographsfrom the Rhodes-LivingstoneInstitute poster. This paper is based on two chaptersfrom my dissertation,"The Lion in the Path: Fieldworkand Culturein the History of the Rhodes-LivingstoneInstitute, 1937-1964," University of Pennsylvania, 1994. The title is used with apologies to E. M. Forster.The themes raised in his work-of savagery and civilization, and the importanceof the view to the Europeantouring in exotic places-will, however, find some resonanceshere. ' Max and Joan Marwick, interview with author,Chipping Norton, England,25 November 1992; J. A. and FrancesBarnes, interview with author,Cambridge, England, 12 August 1993; M. B. Luk- hero, interview with author,Chipata, Zambia, 29 May 1991. 2 Here I am defining "practices"as practicalactivities necessary for doing fieldwork,but with the understandingthat practices such as these form a continuumwith what we call scientific methods. For example, historiansof the field sciences have shown how the practicesassociated with tourism partlyformed the basis of astronomers'solar eclipse expeditions in the late Victorianperiod and, in the early Victorianperiod, how the practicesof painters,mining engineers, and prospectorscame to be employedby geologists. Alex Soojung-KimPang, "Spheresof Interest:Imperialism, Culture, and ?) 1996 by The History of Science Society. All rights reserved.0021-1753/96/8401-0001$01.00 OSIRIS,2nd series, 1996, 11: 237-258 237 238 LYNETTESCHUMAKER between the material culture and technology of a science and the view of the field that informs its daily practice and makes the field what it is for that science. The history of colonial science in Africa has suffered from too sharp a dichotomy be- tween the external and the indigenous, science being viewed as a European import more or less successfully transferred into a hostile environment. The field science perspective brings to the history of colonial science in Africa the ability to ground that science in its African context and thus to understand what is African about science in Africa. Since at least the 1920s, fieldwork has held a special place in anthropology, both as a scientific method and as a central tenet of its professional ethos.3 Ideally field- work involves living for a length of time in the society the anthropologist is study- ing-learning the language, collecting data of various kinds, observing daily activi- ties, and, it is hoped, coming to understand the world view of the local people. Only after such experiences is an anthropologist considered qualified to contribute to the discipline's chief aim of producing theories about human social and cultural behav- ior. As part of the discipline's ethos, fieldwork also functions as the essential rite of passage that any student of anthropology must endure before aspiring to an aca- demic career. The Rhodes-Livingstone Institute (RLI) in Northern Rhodesia (now Zambia) pro- vides a good case study for a field science approach to the history of anthropology (see Fig. 1). The RLI was the institutional focus for a large group of anthropologists who accomplished path-breaking work after World War II, work based not only on fieldwork in the usual rural setting for anthropology but also in an urban setting new to anthropology. In the 1930s the governor of Northern Rhodesia, keen on the poten- tial uses of anthropology for solving problems of social change in the colony, pushed for the founding of an anthropological institute and garnered support for it from local sources such as the mining companies.4 After World War II, this institute be- came part of the British government's postwar colonial development effort and was lavishly funded by the Colonial Social Science Research Council (CSSRC). This enabled the RLI to recruit a team of talented young anthropologists, most of whom were working for their doctorates. The RLI's first directors set out to create a coordinated program of applied anthro- pology useful for colonial development. They trained teams of researchers specifi- cally for that purpose, attempting to achieve comparability of data on a range of topics studied in different field sites. This went beyond the usual collection of gene- alogies used by anthropologists to unravel kinship structure, extending to the collec- Practice in British Solar Eclipse Expeditions, 1860-1914," Ph.D. diss. Univ. Pennsylvania, 1991; MartinJ. S. Rudwick, "The Emergenceof a Visual Languagefor Geological Science, 1760-1830," History of Science, 1976, 14:149-195. 1 The functionalistanthropologist's use of tent and fieldworkto establish ethnographicauthority has been discussed in George W. Stocking, Jr., "The Ethnographer'sMagic: Fieldwork in British Social Anthropology from Tylor to Malinowski," in Observers Observed: Essays on Ethnographic Fieldwork, ed. George W. Stocking, Jr. (History of Anthropology, 1) (Madison: Univ. Wisconsin Press, 1983), pp. 70-120; and in JamesClifford, "On Ethnographic Authority," in ThePredicament of Culture: Twentieth-Century Ethnography, Literature, andArt, ed. James Clifford (Cambridge, Mass.: HarvardUniv. Press, 1988). 4 RichardBrown discusses this factor in the reception given to Godfrey Wilson, the RLI's first director,in 'Anthropologyand Colonial Rule: GodfreyWilson and the Rhodes-LivingstoneInstitute, Northern Rhodesia," in Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter, ed. Talal Asad (London: Ithaca Press, 1973). A TENT WITH A VIEW 239 NorthernR e ia Figure 1. Northern Rhodesia with respect to Africa. tion of demographic statistics that RLI researchers used for comparative analysis of the variety of local societies and their adaptation to changes brought about by urbanization, industrialization, and labor migration. As a group the RLI anthropolo- gists developed new methods of fieldwork and analysis, including the case method, situational analysis, and network theory, to name but a few. They produced studies that addressed problems of contemporary African life rather than producing retro- spective descriptions of precolonial