In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

  • Acknowledging Knowledge:Dissemination and Reception of Expertise in Colonial Africa
  • Dmitri van den Bersselaar

I

At every level, the functioning of African colonial societies depended on the availability and mediation of useful information and knowledge. The majority of the existing literature on "colonial knowledge" focuses on one area of this broad field: the various forms of knowledge about their subjects on which colonial states depended. Most of our attempts to understand such knowledge have tended to analyze colonial knowledge as a system: we have tried to identify which were the sets of shared basic assumptions and rules that governed the creation and presentation of knowledge. In analyzing the processes through which colonial knowledge was produced, we have looked at the role of "Orientalism" and other forms of "Othering."1 We have examined various investigative modalities.2 Finally, we have seen how such knowledge may be compared to a pidgin language that allows for communication between colonizers and representatives of the colonized.3 We have also examined the opportunities for Africans to manipulate the outcomes of colonial knowledge creation, [End Page 389] as well as such basic but essential factors as the realities of government support and funding.4

From the perspective of the colonial state, useful knowledge made information available about colonized lands and subjects in a language that was understandable to the administration, and in a format that facilitated its use for policy formulation and planning. Irrespective of whether this knowledge was based on purposely-collected new information (through censuses, surveys, or specially-commissioned research), or tried to interpret existing data, its creation depended on local mediators to make highly specific local practices and systems of knowledge legible to the colonial state.5 These mediators came in many forms. They included African "informants" such as Christian converts or prospective converts, but also chiefs and elders, African clerks in the offices of district officers, and African witnesses in police and other investigations. They also included a range of "experts" such as linguists, anthropologists, medical doctors, surveyors, statisticians, and geologists.

The group of potential experts was much bigger than that of actually-recognized experts, since many other people–including schoolteachers, traders, and missionaries–knew, or had observed, things, which, if expressed in an appropriate form and language, constituted knowledge of vital relevance to the colonial state. What data constituted knowledge in the colonial state–and which informants were considered experts–largely depended on the form in which it was presented, on the extent to which it fitted the expectations of the colonial state, and on its reception by key officials.6 In this context, while African knowledge was mediated by acknowledged European experts, African intellectual authority tended not to be recognized.7

The extent to which actors different from the colonial state–including Western-educated Africans, traditional leaders, African businesses, and European commercial companies–equally depended on mediated knowledge is well known, although not as frequently explored. For instance, African local communities depended on colonial knowledge to the same extent as the state. Many communities and individuals found that in order [End Page 390] to do well under colonialism, one needed to study and understand the way the colonizer's mind worked, what its priorities were, and how colonial bureaucratic structures operated. It is thus not surprising that those Africans who worked as colonial clerks, police officers, or even as mere messengers were regarded in their local communities as "experts" in matters pertaining to the colonial state. These experts could become highly influential, as it was recognized that their ability to speak the colonial language allowed them to manipulate colonial understandings and thereby defend the interests of the community. Eventually, in many African communities, access to such knowledge became a prerequisite for election as traditional leader.8

Thus the study of colonial knowledge must not be limited to the general process of knowledge production, but must examine the specific local contexts in which knowledge was formulated, as well as how knowledge was received and disseminated. To understand the role of knowledge in colonial societies, therefore, we need to study the use of "experts" and "expertise," as well as the ways in which individual experts could either confirm or challenge existing assumptions...

pdf

Share