The intense scholarly debate concerning the shift from orality to literacy has not often directly concerned African historians in spite of the fact that many work closely with oral sources. In the process of publishing a series of locally-written histories, I discovered that transforming oral tradition into written form is ultimately political. It raised a number of important ethical dilemmas for me as a scholar and brought to my attention the power relations inherent in these transactions. Oral knowledge and its transformation is not neutral or entirely benevolent. I found out that the change from an oral to a written knowledge base takes power out of the hands of community elders and puts it into the public domain, where literate men have the advantage and where community security may be vulnerable. As scholars we need to face our own involvement in these political processes, even if we cannot ultimately control them.

No abstract

No abstract

While ethnic identity formulated by historical memory is often understood as the cause of violent conflict in Africa, this qualitative historical study of interethnic relations between Luo and Bantu-speaking communities on the borderlands of Tanzania and western Kenya demonstrates just the opposite. In fact, migration and violent conflicts over land in the late 19th century were the basis for oral traditions that established new microethnic identities. It was only in the colonial era that the modern macroethnicities of Luo and Suba (Bantu), as rigid oppositional identities, began to solidify around land disputes. Historical memory constructs these dynamic microethnic identities around interethnic reciprocal networks that were necessary for gaining security and access to land in the past. During these late 19th-century conflicts, interethnic alliances and marriages were the norm, resulting in many Bantu-speaking communities becoming Luo, to one degree or another. Historical memory, as the central tool for constructing ethnicity, can be used to promote either violence or peace, depending on how it is deployed. In western Kenya, an oppositional Luo identity resulted from the colonial construction of macroethnicity, while in North Mara, Tanzania, a different national narrative has resulted in relative peace. In his collection of oral traditions from North Mara, Zedekia Oloo Siso makes a case for these still salient microethnicities, based on regional networks that cross-cut ethnic boundaries, as the indigenous networks necessary for peace.

No abstract