2 Addressing Anthropology’s Colonial Heritage

Written by Amanda Zunner-Keating, Jared Seow, Khaleesa Alexander, Faith Donaldson, Brun Mac Ámoinn, Santia Gutierrez, Alexandra Zysman, Zoe Jensen, and Lisa Matthies-Barnes. Some content is adapted from “Beliefs” and “Depolarizing the Classroom.”

Audio recording for Chapter 2 is available on Soundcloud.

2.1 Anthropology, History, and Colonialism

The history of anthropology is connected to the problematic history of colonialism and this is where we must begin our journey together. The actual “beginning” of anthropology is hard to identify because human beings have, to some extent, always been interested in studying each other. Long before anthropology was officially recognized as a field of study, early travel writers and philosophers from ancient societies all over the world studied and wrote about the diversity of human culture (Guest 68). But, before colonialism, anthropology was a field of study that often had no clear value to those who held power in their respective societies (Lewis 269, 300).

The value of anthropology became more pronounced during the era of European expansion from the 16th-20th centuries, as European countries strove to expand their political influence and control areas across the entire globe. In many cases however, European-run colonial governments struggled to control local populations (Wolf 1982; Nevins 675; Sullivan 806). During this time, early anthropologists sought to re-brand their work in a way that could assist colonial governments in their missions (Kuper 1973) because, if you can understand a people, you can better exercise control over them.

2.2 So, what is colonialism?

We use the word “colonialism” to refer to the control of people and their land by a foreign power.  While there are still some colonies today, the peak of colonialism took place from the 16th-20th centuries. European powers sought to expand control of the world in order to control its resources (this includes minerals, gems, waterways/trade routes, spices, and, in many cases, people). In some colonial situations, native people were viewed as an obstacle to circumvent, while in other cases, native people were viewed as resources to be enslaved. In all situations, native people were viewed as objects without equal standing or claim to human rights (Vaughan, 921).

2.3 What did colonial anthropologists actually do?

Anthropologists working for colonial regimes produced a great deal of work that was intended to assist the colonial governments in their efforts by:

• Producing propaganda that presented native peoples as “savage” or less-than-human (while producing propaganda that their own people were “civilized”). When these early anthropologists were viewed as “experts,” they were taken at their word by Europeans living at home. And, when anthropologists produced accounts of culture that were steeped in racism, they were justifying the abusive control that European powers sought to keep over the rest of the world (Crewe and Axelby 28-31; Kuper 111; Willis 123).
• Developing a hierarchy of cultural value. European anthropologists believed that their culture was, inherently, the “best” culture. They then strove to compare all other cultures against that standard in order to determine which people were more advanced than the rest. This logic is inherently flawed because the European standard of greatness is not a universal standard and these cultural hierarchies were not objective (Ibid; Trouillot 2003; 1; Mines 312-313).
• Collecting census data. By surveying the number and types of people in each community, the colonial governments could better exercise control.  (ibid)
• Studying and learning the local culture and languages. It was easier to control a population if you could understand how they spoke to each other and about themselves. (ibid)
• Studying and learning about local judicial systems so that the foreign governments could use them to better control the local population. (Ibid)

Cultural anthropology during this time did not look like the cultural anthropology of today. We call anthropologists of this era armchair anthropologists because they did not spend a great deal of time among the people whose cultures they studied (Guest 69; Launay 167). In fact, some never visited the people at all. Armchair anthropologists would rely on information provided by missionaries and government officials in the field; they would then write lengthy articles and books on the native peoples. As you can probably imagine, this type of research is often unreliable and did not actually reflect the realities of cultures it investigated.

Early anthropologists’ impact on the cultures they studied is hotly debated. While we know that anthropologists were offered funding and access to native lands during the era of European expansion (Guest 69; Crewe and Axelby 28-31; Kuper 113), and that many of these anthropologists marketed themselves as helpful to colonial governments in order to gain funding and other support (Kuper 94-114), the actual contribution that anthropology made to colonial rule is widely contested (Stocking 3-8; Asad 1991). Anthropologist Adam Kuper argues that anthropologists were in fact mostly ignored by government officials as eccentrics while anthropologist Talal Asad argues that the contributions of early anthropologists were too specific to be helpful to colonial administrators.

Did anthropologists directly help colonial governments? This is unclear. But what is clear is that early anthropology was steeped in a worldview of white, European supremacy during its early development (Wolf, Zuberi and Bonilla-Silva 18-19). Whether each individual anthropologist was assisting or resisting the colonial effort, they were working within a framework that constructed the world in a binary construct of European whiteness versus the rest of the world (Trouillot 2003, 103; Said, 1). This worldview is deeply flawed, problematic, and requires modern anthropologists to overcome our damaging history (James 32-33).

At this point, you need to understand how important critical thinking is in this class (and, indeed, in all classes). Each anthropologist that we read and study in our course will have a political viewpoint, personal bias, and academic agenda. All people are steeped in a particular worldview and this worldview will inevitably come through in our work. Some colonial anthropologists will strive to construct native peoples as subhuman while some post-colonial anthropologists might fail to fully recognize a damaging cultural practice within a community. Please prepare yourself to critically examine everything that you read and learn in this course and in this text as well.

2.4 Why do we care about colonialism now?

Please look at a world map and take a moment to identify which parts of the world were colonized. With, arguably, the exception of two countries (Lesotho and Ethiopia) the entire African continent was colonized during the era of European expansion, as were all of South America and the Pacific. More than half of the Middle East and Asia was colonized by European countries during this time. When we look at the world as a whole, we can see that the wealth disparity between the richer European (and European-heritage) countries and the significantly poorer nations in the rest of the world reflect colonial borders. This is no coincidence! When European colonial governments were mining other parts of the world and stealing their valuable resources while simultaneously enslaving the people for free labor, the colonial powers became steadily richer while native people became poorer (Willis 1972; Wolf 1982). This wealth disparity led to technological advancements in the European and European-heritage nations while the robbed nations were weakened over and over again, leading to the disparity that impacts our daily lives today.

Perhaps most importantly, we can consider our own history to understand the impact of colonialism. For example, the Eastern United States was colonized by the British until that community rebelled against the British crown and became the American colonists. The Southern states were colonized by the French until they were sold to the American colonists and the Southwest United States was colonized by the Spanish until it was taken by American colonists through warfare (in between, much of that territory was Mexico’s land after Mexico pushed Spain out. It was taken by the Americans. California transitioned from Mexican to American rule in 1850).

In the United States, we live in a former colony and our colonial heritage impacts all areas of our lives. Consider the two majority languages that we speak in our country: English and Spanish. These are not native languages, these are the languages of the colonizer. Consider the majority religion: Christianity. This is the religion brought over by the colonists. Our judicial system, legal structure, style of dress, the holidays we celebrate, and our gender roles are all cultural forms that were brought to this land through European heritage. So, we cannot separate our modern lives from colonial history.

2.5 Cultural Relativism

Colonial anthropologists practiced ethnocentrism. Ethnocentrism is the practice of measuring the achievements or cultural practices of another community against your own cultural standards. In other words, if your favorite color is blue then you might say that a green car is ugly because it isn’t blue. In this circumstance, we know that the judgment is not objective because not everyone agrees that blue is better than green. This was the logical mistake that many fields made during the Era of European expansion: they decided that European culture was the best and then measured everyone else’s value against how ‘European’ their cultures were (Hammond 1; Lewis 586).

Anthropologist Franz Boas developed the concept of cultural relativism in direct response to this kind of ethnocentric thinking. Cultural relativism is the most important skill to learn in this course. Cultural relativism is the principle that all cultural beliefs and practices are equally valid in their own context. In other words, to judge a culture other than your own based on the standards that you learned within your cultural setting is always a pointless exercise that is biased by ethnocentrism. Instead of judging from the perspective of an outsider, as early anthropologists did, we now strive to understand cultures through their own, culturally-specific logics.

2.6 Sheila Walker establishes positive ethnocentrism and Afrocentrism

Written by, Brun Mac Ámoinn, Santia Gutierrez, and Amanda Zunner-Keating. Edited by Marina Cunin Borer and Travis DuBry.

The question of ethnocentricity is re-framed by anthropologist Sheila Walker. In “The Virtues of Positive Ethnocentrism: Some Reflections from An Afrocentric Anthropologist,” Walker argues that anthropologists should recognize our colonial history as, actually, one of Eurocentrism whereby early anthropological works prioritized and centered the cultures and norms of people with white/European heritage. Walker makes the point that ethnocentrism can be defined as a focus and appreciation for one’s own group. Ethnocentrism, in this way, can actually allow anthropologists to focus, specifically, on studying people with whom they feel kinship in order to bring that essential emic perspective into anthropological discourse. Walker calls this positive ethnocentrism and labels her own work as “Afrocentric.” Walker has extensively researched issues facing the African Diaspora and centers these perspectives in her own work.

Ethnocentrism can also be defined as “the evaluation of others’ cultures according to preconceptions originating in standards and customs of one’s own culture.”, Walker, therefore, argues that cultural norms and practices around the world should be analyzed by people of those groups.

Sheila Walker’s area of expertise is the African Diaspora. Her work centers primarily on the processes of identity formation, celebrating one’s own culture, and hybridity as distinct from earlier models of syncretism (the process of two or more independent cultural systems, or elements, conjoining to form a new and distinct system.)  Walker’s main research goal is to debate the stationary view of cultural transformation in prominent discussions of Black culture and identity.

Issues facing the African Diaspora are largely hidden from the public eye, but Walker uses the mediums of writing, teaching, and filmmaking to create space for this story to be told. Walker has spent her entire professional career collecting and preparing field research on the African Diaspora in an attempt to impact the widest audience possible. She releases books and documentaries on the subject.

Perhaps Walker’s first major dive into activism was her conception and editing of the newsletter “Notes from the Natives” as a graduate student. The newsletter was created for use by the Caucus of Black Anthropologists, an organization dedicated to “discuss the issues and problems concerning the lack of minorities and their contributions in anthropology and the social sciences” (Harrison 17). Walker worked on this newsletter for quite some time, completing her schooling and eventually earning her doctorate in 1975. After this, she began writing another newsletter for the Association of Black Anthropologists.

As time went on, Walker diverged more into leadership positions including director of Afrodiasporia Inc., a non-profit dedicated to the creation and distribution of educational materials regarding the African diaspora. Over time, Walker would head multiple documentaries mainly describing the many relevant ways the transatlantic slave trade impacted the spread of African culture across the globe, such as “Scattered Africa: Faces and Voices of the African Diaspora” (2008) and “Slave Routes: A Global Vision” (2010). The latter was a project done in tandem with the UNESCO foundation; one of her many accomplishments within her career in filmmaking. In Walker’s own words, “By understanding this silent chapter of world history, we can better grasp the genealogy binding the slave trade to other crimes against humanity, and new forms of enslavement.” (Slave Routes, 2010). Her contributions to the introduction of the present reality of the African Diaspora to the common people are undeniable, as well as the spirit and initiative she brought to the Black community around her.

2.7 William Shedrick Willis Jr advanced the goals of scientific antiracism

Written by Jared Seow and Amanda Zunner-Keating. Edited by Lara Braff and Lisa Valdez. 

As the field of anthropology was initially steeped in colonial interests, many anthropological projects sought to advance the idea of biological determinism (the false idea that people’s traits and characteristics are biological). With early anthropologists seeking this connection between biology and culture, early biological anthropologists and cultural anthropologists produced bodies of work attempting to establish a discrete and hierarchical categorization of the races while similarly demonstrating the racial connection to cultural development. Arguably the first anthropologist to question these ideas was Franz Boas who developed the idea of cultural relativism and sought to disprove the biological connection to culture through scientific antiracism. And yet, Boas’ body of work was limited in scope as – according to the powerful works from ethnohistorian and anthropologist William Shedrick Willis Jr. – anthropologists embracing scientific antiracism still failed to support the Civil Rights movements in the United States (Sanday 145, 259). In general, early antiracist movements within anthropology were used to dismantle the idea that various white groups could be placed on a hierarchical scale while failing to recognize that all racial groups were inherently and biologically equal (ibid). Fortunately, Willis’ career highlighted these shortcomings and paved the way for a new way in anthropological thought.

Willis’ piece titled, “Skeletons in the Anthropological Closet” was initially viewed with some hostility and skepticism because the work so courageously highlighted anthropology’s shortcomings due to the field’s ties to both colonialism and racism.

In this piece, Willis declared that anthropology’s claim to being a “science of man” was deeply delusional, instead stating that it had largely been “the social science that studies dominated colored peoples–and their ancestors–living outside the boundaries of modern white societies.” (Carpenter 2020). Throughout the essay, Willis drew clear parallels between the history of social sciences and its relation to social justice that would further validate his opening claim about racism in anthropology. In addition to identifying anthropology as a discipline “…primarily organized around the “projections of the needs of white people,” Willis also encouraged the rejection of its standards by “…[pointing] towards the need for an ‘urban ethnography’ in which “sociopolitical significance will become the main criterion in selecting research problems” (Carpenter 2020).

In “Skeletons in the Anthropological Closet”, Willis argues that written histories have historically privileged only the voices of white groups while erasing the experiences and testimonies of all other groups (Willis 121). So, throughout his career, Willis advocated for a re-examination of colonial and historical records in order to better identify the previously ignored documents left behind by more diverse groups (Sanday 250). This endeavor resulted in many interesting discoveries. This type of research allowed Willis to identify the presence of patrilineal descent structures among Native American groups in the southeast who had previously been labeled as exclusively matrilineal by anthropologists. Similarly, Willis was able to uncover documents and testimonies that reflected interactions and relationships between Black communities, white communities, and Native American communities in the colonial southeast that demonstrated a campaign of “dividing and conquering” whereby white colonial movements sought to sever ties of cooperation between Black and Native American groups. His findings on this were published in his article titled, “Divide and Rule: Red, White, and Black in the Colonial Frontier” (Sanday 251).

Willis’ dissertation “Colonial Conflict and the Cherokee Indians, 1710–1760,” relied on primary sources to establish evidence of the white cultural influences upon Cherokee customs and society. He went on to research and publish extensively. Of his most significant publications were Colonial Conflict and the Cherokee Indians, 1710-1760 (1955) and “The Nation of Bread” (1957).

Willis’ findings held profound implications for current and future anthropological studies and for our understanding of race. Morton Fried, a highly influential anthropologist recognized the significance of Willis’ studies and stated that “‘Any thorough study of the race problem in any culture,’ he concluded ‘requires some use of Willis’ contribution’ (Fried l964 letter)” (Sanday 1998). Even modern anthropologists recognize Willis’ significance as Brian Carpenter wrote in 2020, Willis’ works continue to have  “deep relevance to our contemporary national turmoil over ongoing racial injustice in America and the murder of George Floyd and so many other Black Americans” (Carpenter 2020).

2.8 Jesus T. Peralta discovers the previously unacknowledged cultural artifacts of pre-colonial Phillipines

Written by Khaleesa Alexander. Edited by Amanda Zunner-Keating, Lisa Matthies-Barnes, and Ken Seligson. 

Jesus Tamayo Peralta is a Filipino anthropologist, playwright, archeologist, artist, and poet who studies pre-colonial Philippines with the hope of uncovering the mystery that is indigenous Filipino culture and possibly present some insight to modern Filipino people about their heritage prior to the influence of the western world. His works present the ways in which anthropologists today can apply their fieldwork and processes to explore the dynamics of history, culture, identity, and knowledge. Peralta encourages anthropologists today to not only research the histories of earlier civilizations through applied processes like archeology and linguistics, but to use the information they find to celebrate and acknowledge the beautiful cultures and histories that may have been erased or demonized by their oppressors. He hopes that anthropologists today will continue to be open to finding new information, even if what is discovered changes their current perception of history, culture, and possibly themselves.

Peralta was not the first to study Indigenous Filipino culture, but he was a pioneer as a Philippine-born anthropologist who also incorporated prehistoric archeology into his works. In his publication, “Glances: Prehistory of the Philippines”, and journals published by the American Institute of Archaeology, Peralta sheds light on the early practices and ingenuity of Filipino civilizations. For example, Neolithic stone tools discovered throughout the Philippines suggested that waterways were utilized as a means of trade and transportation. Additionally, the tools were identified as belonging to the same origin, and therefore, suggested the development of an ancient maritime trade network that connected activity and goods of one island with another. These discoveries indicated that populations across the Island were dynamically communicating and participating with one another and were in fact finding ways to travel across the sea to spread ideas, cultural practices, and technology. Such displays of craftsmanship, innovation, and socialization contradict the journals developed by Spanish emigrants of the late nineteenth century that revealed their “[use of] biological determinism to proclaim their role as the sole purveyors of…‘progress’”(Rodao) and brought forth “assertions of the innate superiority of the ‘white race’ and advocation of a rigid separation between local communities”(Rodao) in order to divide and oppress the people of the Philippines.

A large portion of Peralta’s archeological work focussed on the Cagayan Valley located near the border of the province of Kalinga-Apayao. This was groundbreaking because prior to 1970, little to no archeological work in this area was being done. In this region, archeologists and paleontologists were fascinated by the animal and stone tool remains found because the species these fossils belonged to alluded to the probable possibility that the Philippines was once connected to the mainland country of Asia and the tools suggested a new narrative about the people of this region and their lives. Additionally, in the excerpt “Cagayan Evidence” Peralta explains that stone tools were found that dated back to 750,000 years ago. This in accompaniment with the number of animal remains found close by, suggests the size and nature of the communities that existed during this time. Peralta further explains, “The Cagayan Man was part of this natural system. The human population was small compared to the plant and animal populations, and the number was further subdivided into groups of persons that were related to one another, like those who were members of a single family or several related families. Each grouping would be occupying a certain area within the valley and the members seldom go out of this area”. The findings in this area also suggested that the Cagayan people did not heavily hunt animals for food. Rather, the people foraged for most sustenance and ate meat at a rate that did not damage the environment or cause large harm to the animals of the area. The theme of Cagayan food consumption seemed to be that of what was needed, not excessive.

Peralta’s research highlights the nature of the communities that existed during this time in a way that sways from the narrative of negative-primitive connotations. Though “…at this stage man did not yet have the knowledge of raising crops for food. It is probable that he already had some idea of how plants grow and increase from observing nature”(Peralta). These discoveries as well as Peralta’s hypothesis were monumental to the field of anthropology as they challenged the old assertions about Indigenous Filipinos proposed previously. The people of Cagayan were not only resourceful, but they were intelligent, environmentally conscious, and family-oriented. The diet of the Cagayan also reflects the influence that colonialism had on the food diaspora as most modern Filipino dishes incorporate grains like rice and lots of animals proteins as these foods were not introduced to the Philippines until 3400 B.C. following the wave of migration that brought Indo-Malaysian, Chinese, and Vietnamese peoples to the Philippine Islands. Moreover, after the arrival of Ferdinand Magellan and the Spaniards in 1521, Filipino foods began to shift once again from grain and vegetable-focused dishes to those of meats, creams, and baked goods. Aspects of pre-colonial Philippines concerning food, travel, and development in contrast to modern culture reflect the ways in which the modern understanding of Filipino culture and identity is heavily attributed to the changes that occurred as a result of colonialism.

2.9 Michel-Rolph Trouillot examines the role of imagination and story-telling in the framing of history

Written by Amanda Zunner-Keating and Alexandra Zysman. Edited by Travis DuBry and Lisa Valdez. 

When reflecting upon our shared colonial histories, much of our communal recollection of events is shaped by history books that were, originally, composed in order to maintain the cultural and racial hierarchies of the time. In this way, anthropologists are tasked with re-examining the historical record by identifying primary sources from marginalized voices while critically examining the motivations of those writing dominating historical narratives. Haitian anthropologist Michel-Rolph Trouillot paved the way for this type of work by fusing together his expertise in both historical and cultural analysis.

In his book, “Silencing the Past: Power and the Production of History,” Trouillot argued, “narratives are necessarily emplotted in a way that life is not. Thus, they necessarily distort life whether or not the evidence upon which they are abased could be proved correct. (Trouillot 6).” In his work, Trouillot rightly pointed out that human lives are not fictional stories written by a singular author. His work demonstrates that life does not have an inherent plot structure but that, rather, the traditional plot structures that we rely on for storytelling are constructed by the human mind. Of course, in order to make sense of seemingly random and confusing elements of life, human beings apply a plot structure to past events. We tell stories about ourselves in order to make sense of what has happened to us.

Trouillot’s work closely examined the relationship between culture, identity, and stories. His work challenged the powerful Western hegemonic framework which allows for social scientists and citizens to tell their stories as a vessel of understanding themselves. In his book, “Global Transformations,” Trouillot wrote, “historical narratives necessarily produce silences that are themselves meaningful. What are the major silences in the history the West tells about itself? (Trouillot 1995)”

Trouillot illustrates this by offering his readers the example of The Alamo. The Battle of the Alamo was, as Trouillot explains, a great defeat to the Texans who sought to defend the fort. The chant “Remember the Alamo!” re-framed the military loss as a story of martyrdom to a bigger cause. This slogan was used as a powerful rallying cry that motivated more people to join the fight, ultimately fueling the defeat of Mexico in favor of the Republic of Texas (Trouillot 2–3).

Trouillot’s work demonstrates the important intersection between history and power. He reminds his readers that only the most powerful typically write our history books. He asks, who decides how we remember our history? In Trouillot’s view, the historical erasure of the experiences of less powerful groups serves the function of shaping our global culture and global mentality, always favoring the most powerful. Trouillot argues that writing history itself is making history. In other words, the way that we recall our collective pasts can directly shape our belief systems in the present and future choices.

Michel-Rolph Trouillot began his life as a student activist, history scholar, and writer in Port-au-Prince. Among his many achievements, Trouillot wrote and published the first Creole language book on Haitian history that strove to examine the nation’s story in a new lens. Titled, “Ti difé boulé sou istwa Ayiti 1997 (in English: “A Small Fire Burning on Haitian History”), the book takes a culturally-specific approach to the telling of Haiti’s history that incorporates local proverbs, and religious elements throughout (Bonilla 2013). This book offered a more accessible form of his nation’s history. As a result of his academic activism, Trouillot was forced to leave Haiti for the United States in order to escape the repressive Duvalier regime that strove to silence the voices of student activists (Bonilla 2013). He fled his home country to escape a repressive dictatorial regime that viewed academics as a threat to power. Upon establishing himself in the United States, he transformed the lens through which anthropologists study and understand the relationship between power, history, and story-telling.

Trouillot’s influence transcends anthropology, his work lending itself to history, sociology, and Afro-Carribean studies. His work spanned these many fields, influencing each of them with his unique writing style and his distinctive understanding of narrative writing.

2.10 Eduardo Chivambo Mondlane applied anthropology to support the anti-colonial revolution

Written by Zoe Jensen and Amanda Zunner-Keating; some content adapted from Depolarizing the Classroom” developed by Amanda Zunner-Keating with significant contributions from Braver Angels and Randy Lioz

Political anthropology examines systems of authority and the social institutions involved that shape how people are organized and governed. Anthropologists interested in this focus may examine power relationships, nationalism, and the creation of states. Political anthropologists similarly examine how our identities are, themselves, politicized and how political life intersects with our race, gender, social class, etc.

Political anthropologists, for example, engage with the concept that, “the personal is political.” This phrase is used to reflect the reality that human beings are politicized and likely to find themselves caught up in political conflict. In our modern world. Many private decisions (such as who to marry or if one should have children) can quickly become public, politicized debates. Anthropologists know that personal decisions and personal identities are politicized and we strive to closely examine how the political realm transforms culture.

The phrase “the personal is political” was first coined by feminist movements in the 1960’s to address a myriad of personal issues that had become publically politicized. Today, this phrase is used to explain issues faced by groups across all sides of the political spectrum. Consider these examples to better understand how the personal can become political:

• Across American history, women have not always had access to a personal medication: birth control. In some cases, women needed a husband’s permission to get the medication or unmarried women weren’t legally allowed to access birth control at all. Regardless of a person’s opinion on this matter, it is clear that laws and regulations – as determined in the political realm – had an enormous impact on women’s personal lives.
• Maternity leave is still largely contentious in the United States as women who bear children often advocate for national policies that protect their employment when they are caring for a newborn (and/or recovering from birth). In these cases, the personal becomes political, because the political realm can change government policies to keep women employed and compensated during recovery (a personal issue).

• Saying “happy holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas” in December can sometimes anger people who feel like their personal holiday, Christmas, is under political attack. Whereas individuals who feel like their right to not celebrate Christmas is equally under attack. This conflict has been a part of American political life since Henry Ford first defended the prioritization of Christmas in the 1920s.
• Publicly discussing (and, often, debating) the events surrounding a tragic public shooting is viewed by many as misappropriating the private, personal grief of victims and their families for political purposes. Whereas others argue that the lack of political will to pass more gun control regulations endangers the personal lives of citizens in public places (with schools being a particular focus). In this case, each side sees their personal concerns and decisions as increasingly politicized.

The politicization of personal life is sometimes minor – like saying “Merry Christmas” –  while it can have violent or dangerous implications in other circumstances when human rights or safety are at stake. Anthropologist Eduardo Mondlane’s lived experiences living under colonial regimes led him to pursue a career in both anthropology and politics which – tragically – exposed him to extreme state violence.

Mondlane’s research focused largely on the legacies and political implications of colonialism Anthropology has a long history with colonialism, with many early anthropological expeditions being in the interest of and funded by colonial governments who desired to learn more about the people they conquered to best subjugate them. While anthropology played a role during the colonization of numerous peoples, later focus on the research of power and politics within the field would aid in dismantling the colonial system and understanding its lasting effects.

Eduardo Mondlane was a Mozambican anthropologist and political activist whose impressive career ultimately aided in the success of the Mozambique Liberation Front, Frente de Libertação de Moçambique (FRELIMO). This movement fought for Mozambican independence from Portuguese colonial rule, championing freedom and highlighting the harsh treatment of Africans within the nation by the colonial government. Mondlane’s years in anthropology provided ample opportunities to study and assess the situation in Mozambique through empirical analyses of the socio-political environment which not only further sparked his passion to free his nation but also gave him a firm understanding of the colonial regime with which he could better subvert Portugal’s hold on Mozambique.

Mondlane intimately understood the way that political subjugation can impact a person’s life when he sought higher education at Witwatersrand University in Johannesburg, where he began to study sociology. His education was cut short due the confiscation of his immigration permit as a result of the implementation of apartheid (SAHO 2019, Cruz E Silva 1988). From South Africa, Mondlane traveled to Lisbon, Portugal, to study and gain a deeper understanding of Portuguese politics. Yet again, he was forced to withdraw due to discrimination and harassment by the Portuguese police (Houser et al. 1969). Ultimately, Mondlane was awarded a PhD in anthropology at Northwestern University with a focus on African politics.

The focus of Mondlane’s dissertation was “Role Conflict in Intergroup Relations”, a subject which he expanded on during his time as a visiting scholar at Harvard (“Eduardo Chivambo Mondlane” 2004, Marcum 1969). In 1957, Mondlane began work at the United Nations as a research officer, tasked with studying the political, economic, and social climate of trust territories from the Trusteeship Department (McQueen 1998). This work required him to travel to the African continent often, including to Mozambique (ibid). Mondlane collaborated with church groups to provide scholarships to students in Mozambique so they could attend schools, inspiring an interest in making education more accessible for children that he would carry with him into his time with FRELIMO (Marcum 1969). He desired to become more politically involved due to the political environment he experienced during his work in the Africa continent and as a result had to leave his position at the UN, instead becoming an assistant professor at Syracuse University in 1961 where he would teach anthropology and later organized a program focused on East African Studies (ibid).

During this time Mondlane directed his energy into writing about colonialism, specifically Portuguese colonialism and its political and economic effects on Mozambique (“Eduardo Chivambo Mondlane” 2004, Darch 2011) In teaching Mondlane aimed to “devote [his] attention to writing and speaking on behalf of [his] people” emphasizing the ignorance in the image of Mozambique and its inhabitants that Portugal puts forth (Darch 2011). His work brought moreawareness of African liberation movements to the U.S. and he introduced many African Americans to the idea of Black Pride while also enlightening white Americans on their part in colonialism and discrimination (Hawley 1979). This was first achieved through giving workshops on Africa in a Christian Camp in Wisconsin, where he first met his wife, to later giving seminars on colonialism to various groups during his time at Syracuse (Shore 1992, Marcum 1969). He resigned in 1963 to fully commit to the liberation movement in Mozambique (ibid). Thus he was able to draw from his time as an anthropologist and researcher turn these experiences into action allowing him to fight against the colonial regimes that had dictated much of his life (Houser et al. 1969).

In 1962 Mondlane spearheaded the unification of many nationalist movements, from which the Mozambican Liberation Front was created (Shore 1992; Houser et al. 1969). During their first conference, Mondlane was named president (Shore 1992). Throughout this time, he was instrumental in the organization, and in founding their core philosophies (ibid).

His book, The Struggle for Mozambique, published in 1969, outlined Mondlane’s ideas for the movement (Shore 1992). He viewed liberation as more than just a physical struggle, the people needed to be empowered and the political consciousness changed. Rebuilding had to come simultaneously with the elimination of the colonial empire; “it was only in the development of the struggle that we learned how rapid and how comprehensive civil reconstruction must be” (ibid). Mondlane sought to unify the masses and start mobilization before direct military action (ibid). An active and attentive leader, Mondlane always adapted to the needs of the people and their demands for change (ibid). Ultimately, the duty of FRELIMO was to empower and support the people of Mozambique.

In Dar es Salaam, 1969, Mondlane’s life was cut short as he was assassinated via a bomb suspected to be of Portuguese origin (Houser et al.1969, SAHO 2019). Instead of weakening, the movement strengthened in his honor and the country was liberated in 1975 (Shore 1992).

2.11 Archibald Mafeje breaks down colonial barriers through Pan-Africanism

Written by Lisa Matthies-Barnes. Edited by Amanda Zunner-Keating. 

During the early 19th-century, many great Black African scholars and political leaders sought to unify the peoples of the Africa continent. This came in response to the centuries-long history of colonialism, a process that worked to strip Africa not only of its natural resources, but also of its peoples. As with any large continent, Africa was originally divided by internal networks of culture and practice – each group demonstrating a unique cultural identity while engaging with peers and neighbors. These engagements were through exchange, marriage, war, and other forms of reflexive social engagements common to all peoples of the world. With the Great Scramble for Africa, Euro-colonial forces severely split Africa and severed its peoples from not only their place of heritage, but the future that the resource-rich Africa would bring its people. For some prominent intellectuals and civil leaders, this history would lead to the Pan-African Movement – a political ideology that seeks redress through the removal of colonial governments and jurisprudence, and a return of cultural identity and unification for both indigenous and diasporic peoples of African heritage. One such proponent for this movement was Archibald “Archie” Boyce Monwabisi Mafeje.

Mafeje contributed significantly to the scholarship of pan-African anthropological study and research. Throughout his career, Mafeje expanded on concepts that demanded the removal of colonial roots from the African education system. He fought tirelessly for the reclamation of Africa for its pre-colonial people — for Africans to be able to investigate its past and understand it through ways of knowing that remove Western ontological and political caps. He promoted the then-unprecedented idea that pan-African peoples should be able to speak for themselves, tell their histories, explore the cultural and natural resources Africa has endowed to it, and to decide its future. His academic focus, which often criticized methods and theories of anthropology as being Eurocentric, effectively worked towards decolonizing African identity and its historicized past.

Throughout his multiple academic positions, Mafeje consistently championed for the oppressed and fought segregation, often advocating for Black rights against apartheid South Africa. His demand for the removal of imperialist, Western ideologies from Black African anthropology generated a much-needed critique on the precepts of early anthropology as a discipline, and the manner in which academics pursued the study of the ascribed “other.” In pursuit of his scholarly achievement, Archie Mafeje became exiled from South Africa under apartheid-era segregation laws only returning in the early 2000s after such laws were lifted in the 1990s.

During his scholarly pursuits, Mafeje helped to create the Council for the Development of Social Science Research in Africa (CODESRIA) — which removed the Western lens from pan-African research and prioritized an Afrocentric approach. He was a trailblazer in discourse on African agrarian landscapes, economic ability and stability, criticized prominent concepts of economic dualism, and emphasized the need for political liberation in African academia. In his later years, he highlighted the importance of ethnographic work in exploring historical narratives to create a more holistic image of past African lifeways. As an example, in his seminal book, The Theory and Ethnography of African Social Formations (1991), he outlines the relationship between political organization and economic power in early East African societies to establish an epistemological understanding of pre-colonial community development — separate from Western prerogatives and characterizations of African peoples.

In 1967, Mafeje applied to become a lecturer at the University of Cape Town, wanting to return to his alma mater, and was granted the position that same year. He was to begin in 1968 — following the completion of his Ph.D. But the offer was later rescinded due to segregation laws in place preventing Black African professors from overseeing White students in their education.

The education minister, Jan de Klerk, stated that appointing a Black African lecturer would defy “the accepted traditional outlook of South Africa” (“Appointment of Black Professor”, p. 14). The act of rescinding Mafeje’s position led to a multi-day student sit-in, consisting of roughly 600 students, across the University of Cape Town and Witwatersrand University. It also prompted the Dean of Faculty of Arts at UCT, Professor M.W. Pope, to resign in solidarity with Mafeje, who was already well-liked by students and faculty from his time as a student and as an academician who was known to speak plainly and directly, confronting prejudice and social inequities. This protest was South Africa’s first sit-in and is remembered as being relatively peaceful, with demonstrators facing a smoke-bomb and false bomb-threat. During this time, protestors renamed the hall in which they were protesting to “Mafeje Hall” (“S. African Students Defy P.M”, p. 4). The experience of having this position revoked due to skin color further reified Mafeje’s work in “political, economic, and cultural emancipation” of Africa (Hendricks 2007: 1).

Ultimately, the protest could not overcome the structural racism and apartheid laws of South Africa that prevented Mafeje from claiming his deserved position as social anthropologist lecturer. In 1969, Mafeje became the Head of Sociology at the University of Tanzania in Tanzania, East Africa — but suffered multiple injuries in a car accident in 1971, the same year he wrote: “The Ideology of Tribalism,” which confronted concepts of the “dual economy” (Nabudere 2011: 14). This experience caused Mafeje not to return to the University of Tanzania. After leaving the University of Tanzania, he continued in academia as a visiting professor in Zambia, Zimbabwe, and Namibia. Beginning in 1973, he joined the Institute of Social Sciences at the Hague as professor of Anthropology and Sociology. With this role, he became the “first African scholar to be distinguished in the Netherlands” (CODESRIA 4: 2007).

Mafeje’s dynamic life tells a story of both abject pain and unparalleled achievement. His ability to defy, challenge, and overcome forms of institutionalized racism — prominent in the roots of anthropology — reifies the ability of Black scholarship in anthropology. He boldly and completely demonstrated the need for inclusivity, reflexivity, and intersectionality that anthropology aims to be based in. Mafeje’s story is a rare one — even today, anthropology, as a discipline, has a problem with race and racism. Mafeje’s incomparable work to demand a more complete and more truthful telling of the anthropology of Africa has created a space where modern academics can speak out and continue to work towards equity in understanding and knowledge creation.

2.12 Ismael Garcia-Colón emphasizes the presence of colonial legacies in modern life

Written by Faith Donaldson. Edited by Lindsay Donaldson and Amanda Zunner-Keating. 

The colonial era of the 15th-century Spanish conquistadors has not fully come to an end. It lives on through American concepts of gender, class, and race. Each demographic can, and does, affect the other. This is shown especially by the state of Latinx migrant farm workers throughout the nation. Ismael Garcia-Colón highlights this in his deep research of not only migrant farm workers, but the lives of the most overlooked American citizens: Puerto Ricans.

Unlike most anthropologists, Garcia-Colón strayed from the traditional approach of studying a group to which he does not belong. Instead, he decided to research a social group he already identified with. Because of his familiarity, he found that establishing rapport was a particularly easier task when conducting his research out in the field.

In “Colonial Migrants at the Heart of the Empire: Puerto Rican Works on U.S. Farms”, Garcia-Colón examines migrant workers who are mistreated through working, living, and social conditions due to their immigration status. Unlike Mexican migrant workers, Puerto Ricans are often unwanted by employers due to their inability to be threatened by deportation. However, due to former President Trump’s continuously restrictive immigration policies during his time in office, Purto Ricans have become more appealing – though working and living conditions remain stagnantly poor.

According to Garcia-Colón, colonialism exhibits itself within American society clearly. Puerto Ricans, though citizens, have yet to gain the voting rights and government autonomy that could potentially lift them from circumstances such as labor exploitation. Since colonialism is the root of race hierarchy, its current presence is what makes ignoring the inequity of Puerto Ricans in the United States, a simple task. It places white farm owners at a significant advantage, and grants them power over the migrant farm workers they can easily exploit.

Garcia-Colón has also written articles highlighting the experiences of Puerto Ricans both on the island and the U.S. mainland. He has written about the land distribution program of Puerto Rico, as well as the farm labor riot in 1966 New York and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on migrant workers. He has excellently connected both historical and current mistreatment of Puerto Rican citizens, in a pattern created by colonialism.

Latinx peoples have experienced extreme vocal decimation throughout history due to this highlighted colonialism. Racism in the United States especially has caused Latinxs to remain marginalized and disproportionately impoverished, and therefore, ignored. Because of their ancestors’ direct experiences with colonialism, and the aftermath that has affected generations afterward, it is important to consider the perspectives of these repeatedly muted voices.

Chapter 2 Bibliography

• African Students Defy P.M. (1968). The Sydney Morning Health, 4.
• “Anthropologists Engaged.” Anthropology and Development: Culture, Morality and Politics in a Globalised World, by Emma Crewe and Richard Axelby, Cambridge University Press, 2014, pp. 28–31.
• “Anthropology for the 21st Century.” Essentials of Cultural Anthropology: a Toolkit for a Global Age, by Kenneth J. Guest, W. W. Norton and Company, 2020, pp. 9–69.
• Appointment of Black Professor is Blocked. (1968). Tyler Morning Telegraphy, 14.
• Asad, Talal. “Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter.” The Politics of Anthropology, doi:10.1515/9783110806458.85.
• Boas, Franz. The Mind of Primitive Man. Forgotten Books, 2015.
• Bonilla, Yarimar. “Burning questions: the life and work of Michel-Rolph Trouillot, 1949-2012.” NACLA Report on the Americas, vol. 46, no. 1, spring 2013, pp. 82+. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A328164709/AONE?u=cclc_pierce&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=12c45eff.
• Carpenter, Brian. “The Anti-Racist Scholarship of William Shedrick Willis.” American Philosophical Society, 2 June 2020, www.amphilsoc.org/blog/anti-racist-scholarship-william-shedrick-willis.
• Cruz E Silva, Teresa. “The Influence of the Swiss Mission On Eduardo Mondlane (1930-1961).” Journal of Religion in Africa, vol. 28, no. 2, BRILL, 1988, pp. 187–209, https://doi.org/10.1163/157006688X00054.
• CODESRIA (2007). Archie Mafeje: A Tribute. http://www.codesria.org/IMG/pdf/tribute_mafeje.pdf
• Darch, Colin. “Eduardo Mondlane : Dissent on Mozambique.” African yearbook of rhetoric 2.3, 2011, pp. 45–59.
• Editor, M. (2017, April 5). Jesus Peralta, Fr. VILLAROEL honored in 32nd Gawad Ustetika. The Varsitarian. https://varsitarian.net/literary/20170329/jesus-peralta-fr-villaroel-honored-in-32nd-gawad-ustetika.
• “Eduardo Chivambo Mondlane.” Encyclopedia of World Biography, 2nd ed., vol. 11, Gale, 2004, pp. 100-101. Gale eBooks, link.gale.com/apps/doc/CX3404704522/GVRL?u=amst&sid=bookmark-GVRL&xid=560e ceb4.
• “Elevating the Voices of Latinx Anthropologists.” Anthropology News, 21 Apr. 2021, www.anthropology-news.org/articles/elevating-the-voices-of-latinx-anthropologists/.
• García-Colón Ismael. Colonial Migrants at the Heart of Empire: Puerto Rican Workers on U.S. Farms. Calif.
• Harrison, Ira E. The Association of Black Anthropologists: A Brief History. 1st ed., vol. 3, Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 1987, ABA’s History and Purpose, aba.americananthro.org///wp-content/uploads/2012/05/ABA-A-Brief-History-IraHarrison.pdf.
• Hawley, Edward A. “Eduardo Chivambo Mondlane (1920–1969): A Personal Memoir.” Africa Today, 1st Qtr., vol. 26, no. 1, 1979, pp. 19–24., www.jstor.org/stable/4185824.
• Hendricks, F. (2007). EDITORIAL: A brief tribute to Archie Mafeje. African Sociological Review /Revue Africaine De Sociologie, 11(1), 1 3.http://www.jstor.org/stable/24487581
• Houser, George, Theodore Tucker, Issoufou Saidou Djermakoye, Akili Danieli, Hahmoud Mestiri, Guilherme Mabunda, and Peter Weiss. “Eduardo Chivambo Mondlane June 1920— February 1969.” Memorial Service, 13 Feb. 1969, https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/al.sff.document.pwmoz000027
• “Imaginative Geography and Its Representations.” Orientalism, by Edward W. Said, Vintage Books, 2004, pp. 49–72.
• Kuper, Adam. Anthropology and Anthropologists: the Modern British School. Routledge, 2006.
• Mascia-Lees, Frances E. Gender and Difference in a Globalizing World: Twenty-First-Century Anthropology. Waveland Press Inc, 2010.
• Marcum, John A. “A Martyr for Mozambique.” Africa Report, vol. 14, no. 3-4, African-American Institute, etc, 1969, pp. 6–9.
• McQueen, Albert J. “In Memory of Eduardo Chivambo Mondlane ’53 1920–1969 to Be Honored at May Reunion.” Alumni News & Notes, Oberlin.edu, 1998, www2.oberlin.edu/alummag/oampast/oam_spring98/Alum_n_n/eduardo.html.
• “Mondlane, Eduardo Chivambo (1920–1969).” New Encyclopedia of Africa, edited by John Middleton and Joseph C. Miller, 2nd ed., vol. 3, Charles Scribner’s Sons, 2008, p. 575. Gale eBooks, link.gale.com/apps/doc/CX3049000451/GVRL?u=amst&sid=bookmark-GVRL&xid=28cf 2c7e.
• Nabudere, D.W. (2011). Archie Mafeje: Scholar, Activist and Thinker. African Institute of SouthAfrica.
• Nyoka, B. (2012). Mafeje and ‘Authentic Interlocutors’: An appraisal of his epistemology. African
• Peralta, Jesus T. “Ancient Mariners of the Philippines.” Archaeology, vol. 33, no. 5, Archaeological Institute of America, 1980, pp. 41–48, http://www.jstor.org/stable/41726497.
• Peralta, J. T. (2018, October 12). The Cagayan EVIDENCE. National Commission for Culture and the Arts. https://ncca.gov.ph/about-culture-and-arts/culture-profile/prehistory-of-the-philippines/the-cagayan-evidence/.
• Peralta, J. T. (n.d.). Reflections on Philippine culture and society. Google Books. https://books.google.com/books?id=K_eXixQtA84C&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ViewAPI#v=onepage&q&f=false.
• Peralta, J. T. (2018, October 12). GLANCES: Prehistory of the Philippines. National Commission for Culture and the Arts. https://ncca.gov.ph/about-culture-and-arts/culture-profile/prehistory-of-the-philippines/.
• Pierre, J., 2021. Walker, Sheila S. | African Film Festival, Inc.. [online] Africanfilmny.org. Available at: <https://africanfilmny.org/directors/sheila-walker/> [Accessed 25 May 2021].Otusheso, C., 2021. Meet the Speakers : Sheila S Walker, PhD – MIPAD. [online] Blog.mipad.org. Available at: <https://blog.mipad.org/meet-the-speakers-sheila-s-walker-phd/> [Accessed 25 May 2021].
• Rodao, Florentino. “‘The Salvational Currents of Emigration’: Racial Theories and Social Disputes in the Philippines at the End of the Nineteenth Century.” Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, vol. 49, no. 3, 2018, pp. 426–444., doi:10.1017/S0022463418000346.
• Sanday, Peggy Reeves. “Skeletons in the Anthropological Closet: The Life and Work of William S Willis Jr.” African-American Pioneers in Anthropology, University of Illinois Press, Chicago, 1999.
• Special IssueSheena Macmillan — Published November 3, 2020 9 minutes, et al. “Filipino History Lessons Taught through Food: Special Issue.” The Link, https://thelinknewspaper.ca/article/filipino-history-lessons-taught-through-food.
• SAHO. “Eduardo Mondlane.” South African History Online, 2019, www.sahistory.org.za/people/eduardo-mondlane.
• “Sheila Walker.” African Film Festival Inc, New York State Council on the Arts, africanfilmny.org/directors/sheila-walker/.
• Shore, Herbert. “Remembering Eduardo: Reflections on the Life and Legacy of Eduardo Mondlane.” Africa Today, 1st Qtr. — 2nd Qtr., vol. 39, no. 1/2, 1992, pp. 35–52., www.jstor.com/stable/4186802.
• Sociological Review / Revue Africaine De Sociologie, 16(1), 2–16. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24487685
• Strong, Krystal. “Love for My People: Some Reflections on Sheila Walker and Life‐Affirming Anthropology.” Transforming Anthropology, vol. 28, no. 2, 2020, pp. 125–126., https://doi.org/10.1111/traa.12197.
• “The Politics of Anthropology.” Gender and Difference in a Globalizing World: Twenty-First-Century Anthropology, by Frances E. Mascia-Lees, Waveland Press Inc, 2010, pp. 69–70-212.
• “Toward A Definition of White Logic and White Methods .” White Logic, White Methods: Racism and Methodology, by Tukufu Zuberi and Eduardo Bonilla-Silva, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2008, pp. 18–19.
• Trouillot, Michel-Rolph. Global Transformations: Anthropology and the Modern World. Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.
• Trouillot, Michel-Rolph. Silencing the Past: Power and the Production of History. BeaconPress, 1995.
• Trouillot, Michel-Rolph. Ti Dife Boule Sou Istwa Ayiti. Edisyon KIK, Inivèsite Karayib, 2012.
• Walker, Sheila, and The Slave Route Project. Slave Routes: A Global Vision/Africans out of Africa (2010). YouTube, UNESCO, 2010, www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXn6lGS-GZE&t=1s.
• Walker, Sheila S. 1991. “The Virtues of Positive Ethnocentrism: Some Reflections of an Afrocentric Anthropologist.” Transforming Anthropology 2(2): 23-26.
• Wikimedia Foundation. (2021, February 5). Jesus T. Peralta. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_T._Peralta.
• “Willis, William Shedrick, 1921–1983 – Social Networks and Archival Context.” Social Networks and Archival Context,  snaccooperative.org/ark:/99166/w661127c.
• Willis , William S. “Skeletons in the Anthropological Closet .” Reinventing Anthropology, edited by Dell Hymes, Univ. of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI, 2002.
• Wolf, E. Europe and the People without History. University of California Press, 1982.